E 

99 
M2L6 


UC-NRLF 


B   M   517   551 


CM 


Q 
>- 


(fa 


GIFT   OF 


OF 

THE  AMERICAN  MUSEUM 

OF  NATURAL  HISTORY 

VOL.  xxi,  PART  I 


NOTES  ON  THE  SOCIAL  ORGANIZATION  AND  CUSTOMS  OF 
THE  MANDAN,   HIDATSA,   AND   CROW  INDIANS 


BY 
ROBERT  H.  LOWIE 


AMERICAN 
MUSfUM 

NATURAL 
HISTORY 


NEW  YORK 

PUBLISHED   BY   ORDER  OF  THE   TRUSTEES 
1917 


American  Museum  of  Natural   History 

PUBLICATIONS  IN  ANTHROPOLOGY. 


In  1906  the  present  series  of  Anthropological  Papers  was  authorized  by  th< 
Trustees  of  the  Museum  to  record  the  results  of  research  conducted  by  the  Depart 
ment  of  Anthropology.  The  series  comprises  octavo"  volumes  of  about  350  page 
each,  issued  in  parts  at  irregular  intervals.  Previous  to  1906  articles  devoted  ti 
anthropological  subjects  appeared  as  occasional  papers  in  the  Bulletin  and  also  ii 
the  Memoir  series  of  the  Museum.  A  complete  list  of  these  publications  with  price 
will  be  furnished  when  requested.  All  communications  should  be  addressed  to  th 
Librarian  of  the  MUSCMIIII. 

The  recent  issues  are  as  follows :  — 

Volume  X. 

1.     Chipewyan  Texts.     By  Pliny  Earle  Goddard.     Pp.  1-66.     1912.     Price 
$1.00. 

II.     Analysis  of  Cold  Lake  Dialect,  Chipewyan.     By  Pliny  Earle  Goddard 
Pp.  67-170,  and  249  text  figures.     1912.     Price,  $1.00. 

III.  Chipewyan  Tales.     By  Robert  H.  Lowie.     Pp.  171-200.     1912.     Price 
$.25. 

IV.  The  Beaver  Indians.     By  Pliny  Earle  Goddard.     Pp.  201-293,  and  T 
text  figures.     1916.     Price,  $1.00. 

V.     Beaver  Texts.     By  Pliny  Earle  Goddard.     Pp.  295-397.     1916.     Price 
including  Part  VI,  $5.00. 

VI.  Beaver  Dialect.  By  Pliny  Earle  Goddard.  Pp.  399-517,  and  191  tex 
figures.  1917.  Price,  including  Part  V,  $5.00. 

Volume  XI. 

I.  Societies  and  Ceremonial  Associations  in  the  Oglala  Division  of  the  Teton 

Dakota.  By  Clark  Wissler.     Pp.  1-99,  and  7  text  figures.     1912.     Price,  $.50. 

II.  Dance  Associations  of  the  Eastern  Dakota.     By  Robert  II.  Lowie.     Pp 

101-142.  1913.     Price,  $.25. 

III.  Societies  of  the  Crow,  Hidatsa  and  Mandan  Indians.     Bv  Robert  H.  Lowie 
Pp.  143-358  and  18  text  figures.     1913.     Price,  $2.00. 

IV.  Societies  and  Dance  Associations  of  the  Blackfoot  Indians.     By  Clarl 
Wissler.  Pp.  363-460,  and  29  text  figures.     1913.     Price,  $1.00. 

V.     Dancing  Societies  of  the  Sarsi  Indians.     By  Pliny  Earle  Goddard.     Pp 
461-474.     1914.     Price,  $.25. 

VI.  Political  Organization,  Cults,  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Plains-Ojibway  ant 
Plains-Cree  Indians.  By  Alanson  Skinner.  Pp.  475-542,  and  10  text  figures 

1914.  Price,  $.75. 

VII.  Pawnee  Indian  Societies.  By  James  R.  Murie.  Pp.  543-644,  and  1< 
text  figures.  1914.  Price,  $1.00. 

VIII.     Societies  of  the  Arikara  Indians.     By  Robert  H.  Lowie.     Pp.  645-678 

1915.  Price,   $.50. 

IX.  Societies  of  the  Iowa,  Kansa,  and  Ponca  Indians.  By  Alanson  Skinnu 
Pp.  679-801,  and  5  text  figures.  1915.  Price,  $1.00. 

X.  Dances  and  Societies  of  the  Plains  Shoshone.  By  Robert  H.  Lowie.  Pp 
803-835.  1915.  Price,  $.25. 

XI.  Societies  of  the  Kiowa.  By  Robert  H.  Lowie.  Pp.  837-851.  1916 
Price,  $.25. 

XII.  General  Discussion  of  Shamanistic  and  Dancing  Societies.  By  Clarl 
Wissler.  Pp.  853-876.  1916.  Price,  $.25. 

XIII.     Plains  Indian  Age-Societies:   Historical  and  Comparative  Summary.     B 
Robert  H.  Lowie.     Pp.  877-1031.     1916.     Price,  $1.00. 

Volume  XII. 

I.     String-figures  from  the  Patomana  Indians  of  British  Guiana.     By  Fran 
E.  Lutz.     Pp.  1-14,  and  12  text  figures.     1912.     Price  $.25. 

(Continued  on  3d  p.  of  cover.) 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL   PAPERS 


OF 


THE  AMERICAN  MUSEUM 
OF  NATURAL  HISTORY 

VOL.  XXI,  PART  I 


NOTES  ON   THE   SOCIAL  ORGANIZATION   AND   CUSTOMS  OF 
THE  HAND  AN,   HIDATSA,   AND   CROW   INDIANS 


BY 

ROBERT  H.   LOW  IK 

n 


THE 

r  AMERICAN 
MUSEUM 

NATURAL 
HISTORY 


NEW  YORK 

PUBLISHED   BY   ORDER  OF   THE   TRUSTEES 
1917 


XI  2 


NOTES  ON   THE   SOCIAL  ORGANIZATION  AND   CUSTOMS  OF 
THE  MANDAN,  HIDATSA,  AND  CROW  INDIANS. 

BY  ROBERT  H.  LOWIE. 


PREFACE. 

The  Hidatsa,  while  most  closely  related  to  the  Crow,  have  been  in  close 
contact  with  the  Mandan  for  so  long  a  period  that  the  culture  of  all  three 
tribes  must  be  considered  in  conjunction.  That  is  to  say,  it  is  impossible 
to  acquire  an  accurate  picture  of  Hidatsa  life  without  taking  into  account, 
on  the  one  hand,  the  persistence  of  old  elements  characteristic  of  the  parent 
tribe  before  its  division  into  Crow  and  Hidatsa  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
influence  exerted  by  the  Mandan  subsequently  to  the  Crow  separation. 
Our  information  on  the  Mandan,  for  reasons  stated  below,  is  tantalizingly 
meager  and  suggests  rather  than  solves  problems.  Fortunately,  the  Crow 
data  are  sufficiently  extensive  to  permit  a  comparison  of  their  social  culture 
with  that  of  the  Hidatsa  and  to  make  possible  a  reconstruction  of  their 
pristine  organization.  In  a  previous  paper  of  this  series  issued  in  1912 
(Vol.  IX,  part  II)  I  dealt  with  the  "  Social  Life  of  the  Crow  Indians."  Since 
its  appearance  I  have  paid  several  visits  to  this  people  and  have  secured 
much  additional  information,  which  partly  confirms  and  in  part  supplements 
and  amends  my  earlier  results.  I  have  naturally  devoted  much  more  space 
to  the  new  material  but  found  it  necessary  to  summarize  briefly  some  facts 
previously  described. 

A  few  words  may  be  in  place  regarding  the  method  followed  in  illustrat 
ing  the  use  of  Crow  kinship  terms.  It  has  become  clear  to  students  that 
relationship  nomenclature  harbors  innumerable  pitfalls  for  the  field  in 
vestigator.  These  can  be  minimized  only  by  utilizing  every  possible  means 
of  checking  the  information  obtained.  We  must  not  content  ourselves  with 
abstract  statements  nor  even  with  the  confirmation  supplied  by  a  genea 
logical  scheme  but  should  determine  the  use  to  which  terms  are  put  by  the 
native  when  not  harried  by  ethnological  questioning,  when,  in  other  words, 
he  is  in  a  perfectly  normal  and  naive  position  with  reference  to  his  tribesmen. 
One  way  to  do  this  is  to  keep  one's  ears  open  in  Indian  households  when  not 
ostensibly  engaged  in  belaboring  the  aboriginal  consciousness;  another 
equally  effective  one  is  to  collect  systematically  the  evidence  yielded  by 
mythological  texts.  It  is  even  possible  to  make  use  of  myths  taken  dowm 
in  English  provided  the  recorder  insists  on  noting  down  in  the  vernacular 
every  relationship  term  that  occurs. 

The  Hidatsa  and  Mandan  were  visited  in  the  summers  of  1910,  1911, 
and  1913,  while  my  acquaintance  with  the  Crow  dates  back  to  1907  and  has 
been  frequently  renewed  since. 

ROBERT  H.  LOWIE. 
June  15,  1917. 

3 


CONTENTS. 

PAGE. 

PREFACE     .  3 

SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  MANDAN  7 

CLAN  SYSTEM                   . 7 

KINSHIP  TERMS        .                           11 

SOCIAL  CUSTOMS 15 

SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  HIDATSA    .  17 

INTRODUCTION ...  17 

GOVERNMENT    .        .                                                    .....  18 

MOIETIES  AND  CLANS      .         .  19 

TERMS  OF  RELATIONSHIP         .                                                                        .  26 

TERMS  OF  CONSANGUINITY          .                                      ....  28 

Speaker's  Generation                                                                .         .  28 

First  Ascending  Generation 31 

Second  Ascending  Generation    .  33 

First  Descending  Generation     .......  33 

Second  Descending  Generation                                              .         .  34 

TERMS    OF    AFFINITY                                                                                                                             .  34 

Speaker's  Generation                                                                         .  34 
First  Ascending  Generation       .         .                                             .36 

First  Descending  Generation     .                           ....  36 

KINSHIP  USAGES ....  38 

Brother  and  Sister    ...                  38 

Brothers;  Mother's  Brothers     .                           .  39 

Sisters        .         .                                   39 

Cousins      ....                           39 

Parents  and  Children        .                                                               .  39 

Father's  Clan    .  40 

Grandparents     .  42 

JOKING-RELATIVES  .         .  .42 

MARRIAGE ....  46 

ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  RELATIVES  BY  MARRIAGE  47 

Parents-in-law    .         .                           .                                    .         .  47 

Daughter-in-law                                                                                  .  48 

Brothers-in-law                                                                                   .  48 

Sisters-in-law .         .  49 

Man  and  Brother's  Wife 49 

Man  and  Wife's  Sisters 49 

Wife's  Brother's  Wife 50 

COMRADES 50 

NAMES 50 

BURIAL 51 


6  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI. 

PAGE 

SUPPLEMENTARY  NOTES  ON  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF  THE  CROW     .  53 

CLANS      .  53 

TERMS  OF  RELATIONSHIP .         .  56 

TERMS  OP  CONSANGUINITY         .         .         .         .        .         .         .         .  59 

Speaker's  Generation         . 59 

First  Ascending  Generation 62 

Second  Ascending  Generation  .         .         .         .         .         .  64 

Descending  Generations .  65 

TERMS   OF   AFFINITY .  .  .  68 

Speaker's  Generation          .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         68 

Other  Generations 71 

KINSHIP  USAGES .         .         .        .     :    .        74 

MARRIAGE 74 

POSITION  OF  WOMEN 77 

SEXUAL  MORALITY  .         . 78 

PRIVILEGED  FAMILIARITY 79 

ETIQUETTE 81 

SOCIAL  ESTIMATION  OF  INDIVIDUALS       .......        82 

.87 

97 


SOCIAL   LIFE   OF   THE    MANDAN. 
CLAN  SYSTEM. 

The  study  of  ancient  Mandan  society  is  rendered  unusually  difficult 
through  the  almost  complete  extinction  of  the  tribe.  There  are  probably 
not  more  than  half  a  dozen  full-blood  Mandan  living  on  the  Fort  Berthold 
Reservation  in  North  Dakota.  Though  the  census  of  1910  sets  their  num 
ber  at  197,  this  is  given  on  the  basis  of  the  native  way  of  tracing  descent  so 
as  to  include  all  those  whose  mothers  only  were  Mandan  or  were  according 
to  the  matrilineal  principle  of  descent  reckoned  as  Mandan.  Living  for  a 
long  period  in  close  contact  with  the  more  numerous  Hidatsa,  with  whom 
intermarriage  has  taken  place  to  a  considerable  extent,  the  younger  Mandan 
so-called  hardly  ever  speak  Mandan  as  fluently  or  correctly  as  Hidatsa.1 

Under  these  circumstances  the  question  naturally  arises  over  and  over 
again  whether  a  given  feature  common  to  Mandan  and  Hidatsa  culture  is 
not  an  Hidatsa  trait  shared  by  the  Mandan  only  since  their  practical  ab 
sorption  in  the  neighboring  tribe.  This  naturally  complicates  the  suffi 
ciently  difficult  question  as  to  the  relative  contributions  of  the  two  tribes  to 
their  common  cultural  stock.  On  this  subject  widely  varying  views  have 
been  held.  Thus,  Morgan,  rather  cavalierly  assumed  that  agriculture 
and  the  earth-lodge  were  brought  into  the  region  by  the  Hidatsa  and  bor 
rowed  by  the  Mandan,2  while  Matthews  has  expressed  the  opposite  opinion.3 

Since  in  culture  the  Hidatsa  differ  from  the  Crow  far  more  than  the 
affinity  of  the  two  languages  and  hence  presumable  recency  of  their  separa 
tion  would  lead  us  to  expect,  it  seems  natural  to  refer  such  divergence  as 
exists  to  Mandan  influence  on  the  Hidatsa.  This  interpretation  would 
lead  to  thoroughly  satisfactory  results  if  we  could  be  sure  that  recently 
collected  Mandan  data  indicating  cultural  identity  with  the  Hidatsa  reflect 
ancient  Mandan  conditions.  Unfortunately,  we  are  frequently  without 
the  means  of  checking  our  information  on  account  of  the  inadequacy  of  the 
early  accounts. 

A  point  of  great  importance  regarding  the  Mandan  is  their  local  and 
linguistic  differentiation.  Whatever  may  be  the  fact  as  to  the  nine  villages 
they  are  said  to  have  inhabited  about  the  Heart  River  confluence  in  1750,4 

1  It  may  be  noted  in  this  connection  that  these  languages,  though  both  of  the  Siouan 
stock,  are  only  remotely  related. 

2  Morgan,  (b),  part  II,  chapter  6. 

3  Matthews,  37f. 

4  Handbook  of  American  Indians,  i,  797. 

7 


8  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

or  the  thirteen  villages  with  which  Maximilian's  informants  credited  them,1 
in  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  there  certainly  were  two  villages, 
Nu'pta  (Ruhptare)  and  Mj'tutak  (Mihtuttahangkusch),  speaking  distinct 
dialects,  as  is  demonstrated  by  Maximilian's  vocabularies.2  One  of  my 
informants  added  a  third  village,  Istape,  (given  by  Morgan  as  a  clan  name), 
where  she  said  the  Nu'pta  dialect  was  spoken. 

It  is  clear  from  Maximilian's  data  that  between  Nu'pta  and  Mi'tut^k 
there  was  also  a  minor  cultural  differentiation  in  the  matter  of  dances. 
The  question  in  connection  with  our  immediate  problem  is  how  to  conceive 
the  relation  of  the  villages  to  the  social  divisions.  Maximilian  tells  us  that 
the  Mandan  called  themselves  "Nu'mangka'ke"  (nu'mak&ki)  i.  e.,  people, 
and  were  wont  to  add  the  name  of  the  village  from  which  they  had  originally 
come.  Thus,  there  were  Prairie-chicken  people,  so-called  after  the  Prairie- 
chicken  village;  Bear  people,  Cactus  people,  Badger  people, —  all  named 
from  corresponding  villages. 

Obgleich  nun  alle  die  oben  genannten  Dorfer  nicht  mehr  existiren,  so  nennen 
sich  dennoch  alle  diese  Indianer  ihrer  Abstammung  zufolge  noch  nach  denselben.3 

This  is  a  clear-cut  statement  to  the  effect  that  the  Mandan  clans  de 
veloped  in  recent  times  from  formerly  distinct  local  groups.  If  we  assume 
that  the  ancient  village  scheme  involved  local  exogamy  and  matrilineal 
descent,  or  that  the  latter  was  grafted  on  the  former,  possibly  through 
borrowing,  the  fusion  of  people  from  different  settlements  would  quite 
naturally  lead  to  the  evolution  of  exogamous  clans.  The  statement  of  one 
of  my  informants  that  all  the  clans  were  found  in  both  Mj'tutak  and  Nu'pta 
is  not  inconsistent  with  such  a  line  of  development  since  this  condition 
would  be  readily  brought  about  by  intermarriage.  However,  all  this  is 
pure  speculation  and  the  questions  involved  will  only  become  clearer  after 
considering  the  social  organization  of  the  Mandan  as  sketched  by  recent 
informants  and  comparing  it  with  that  of  the  Hidatsa  and  other  tribes. 

The  Mandan  were  divided  into  non-exogamous  moieties  corresponding 
in  name  to  those  of  the  Hidatsa,  viz.,  Three-clans  (nu'maka'ki  o'rehe 
na/mini)  and  Four-clans  (nu'maka'ki  o're  top).  According  to  Black-chest, 
the  names  of  the  moieties  and  the  constituent  clans  were  originated  by  the 
legendary  warrior  Seven-wolf  when  returning  from  a  victorious  expedition 
against  the  Arikara.  Information  is  very  meager  as  to  the  functions  of  the 
dual  division  in  tribal  life,  but  here  there  is  again  close  correspondence  to 
Hidatsa  conditions.  During  a  general  council  of  the  Mandan  the  Three- 

1  Maximilian,  u,   103. 
=  ibid.,  557-561. 
3  ibid.,  104. 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 

clans  were  ranged  on  one  side,  the  Four-clans  on  the  other.  In  building 
an  earth-lodge  the  Three-clan  women  would  put  earth  on  one  side  and  the 
Four-clan  women  on  the  other. 

It  is  altogether  improbable  that  the  Hidatsa  and  Mandan  moiety  systems 
should  have  had  an  independent  origin.  The  question  at  once  arises,  then, 
which  was  the  borrowing  tribe.  The  complete  lack  of  any  trace  of  the  dual 
division  among  the  Crow  suggests  that  the  Hidatsa  imitated  the  Mandan 
scheme,  a  conclusion  which  I  was  at  first  tempted  to  draw.  However,  there 
is  no  satisfactory  evidence  on  behalf  of  this  interpretation.  In  the  first 
place,  the  moieties  of  the  Winnebago,  the  closest  linguistic  allies  of  the 
Mandan,  were  exogamous,  while  there  is  no  indication  that  this  applies  to 
the  Mandan  and  Hidatsa  divisions;  moreover,  the  Mandan  differ  from  all 
other  Siouans  and  resemble  the  Hidatsa  and  Crow  in  the  rule  of  matrilineal 
descent.  There  is  thus  no  a  priori  reason  for  assigning  the  role  of  trans 
mitter  to  the  Mandan  rather  than  to  the  Hidatsa.  Secondly,  there  is  a 
disparity  between  the  designations  of  the  Mandan  moieties  and  the  number 
of  their  clans  such  as  does  not  occur  among  the  Hidatsa.  Some  informants, 
to  be  sure,  make  the  number  correspond  to  the  moiety  names,  and  Morgan 
without  speaking  of  a  dual  division  lists  seven  clans.  But  other  Mandans 
give  the  number  as  eleven  or  even  sixteen,  .while  nine  are  reported  by  Mr. 
Curtis.  The  informant  who  spoke  of  sixteen  clans  added  that  more  of 
them  belonged  to  the  Four-clan  than  to  the  Three-clan  moiety,  but  this 
struck  me  as  an  obvious  afterthought, —  as  a  secondary  attempt  to  harmo 
nize  as  best  he  could  two  sets  of  contradictory  facts.  Although  the  informa 
tion  obtained  is  hardly  sufficient  to  permit  a  definite  solution,  I  rather 
incline  to  Mr.  Curtis's  view  that  the  Mandan  moiety  scheme  is  derived  from 
the  Hidatsa,  whose  clans  conform  in  number  to  the  moiety  names. 

The  following  scheme  was  furnished  by  Two-chiefs,  herself  a  member  of 
the  first-named  clan :  — 

Three-Clan  Moiety, 
maxi'  'kina 
tami'sik 
nu'pta 

Four-Clan  Moiety. 

si'  pucka  nu'mak,  Prairie-chicken  people 

xtaxtam  nu'mak,  Young  white-headed  Eagle  * 

manakactdk  nu'mak,  People  all  in  a  bunch  2 

xo'xixa'  ka  nu'mak,  Crow  people  (said  to  refer  to  the  scalp  on  a  stick) 

1  Mr.  Curtis,  (v,  145),  translates  the  word  "Spotted  Eagle." 

2  Presumably  Mr.  Curtis's  Madhakashtak,  "Clump  of  Wood." 


10  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

In  this  list  it  will  be  noted  that  the  third  name  in  the  first  moiety  coin 
cides  with  that  of  the  Nu'pta  village  and  dialectic  division.  Black-chest, 
of  the  same  moiety,  substituted  the  ma'nakactdk  for  the  nu'pta,  and 
Turtle-woman,  likewise  a  Three-clan,  gave  the  tami'kexik  in  the  same  place. 
This  name  suspiciously  resembles  another,  taml'kaxik,  Bad  Packstrap, 
which  the  same  authority  gave  as  an  ancient  designation  of  the  maxi"kina 
people,  who  were  so  named  because  they  used  poor  string  to  tie  with.  Both 
Black-chest  and  Turtle-wroman  regarded  the  taml'sik  as  equivalent  to  the 
Hidatsa  me'e  tsiro'ke  (Knife)  clan.  There  is  no  suggestion  that  this  was 
meant  to  interpret  the  meaning  of  the  name,  and  Turtle-wroman  said  that 
the  tami'sik  were  Wolf  people.  This  is  probably  merely  a  symbolic  refer 
ence  since  the  words  f.or  "wolf"  are  quite  different  in  Maximilian's  vocabu 
laries.  As  regards  the  constitution  of  the  Four-clan  moiety,  Turtle-woman 
and  Two-chiefs  are  in  perfect  agreement. 

Calf-woman  said  that  there  were  eleven  clans  grouped  in  moieties  but 
made  no  attempt  to  classify  the  ten  names  she  actually  supplied.  Like 
Maximilian,  she  regarded  all  the  clans  as  connected  with  different  villages; 
accordingly,  it  is  not  surprising  that  she  should  have  included  nu'pta  in  her 
list.  On  the  other  hand,  several  others  are  omitted  in  her  enumeration, 
which  follows:  — 

si'  pucka 

xtaxta'  nu'ma  ake 

ml'ti  a/ki,  Village  above 

maxahe 

taml'sik 

o're*  'ku'pa,  Seven-different-kinds 

ma'ak  i'xtit  ml'ti,  Hilltop  village 

mi'tixa're,  Scattered  village 

mi'i'tik  e'exicot  nu'makavki,  White-bellied  mouse  people 

nuptare 

Three  names  not  recorded  by  me  at  all  are  given  by  Mr.  Curtis, —  the 
mase'  (kshuk),  Red  Butte;  the  matek,  Badger;  and  the  madhadhacu, 
Charcoal.  Of  these  the  Badger  people  are  also  mentioned  by  Maximilian, 
but  his  Bear  and  Cactus  villages  seem  to  have  no  equivalents  in  either  Mr. 
Curtis's  or  my  own  lists.  Morgan's  *  list  of  seven  clans  includes  the  Prairie- 
chickens,  Maximilian's  Bear  and  Calf-woman's  Village-above  people, — 
also  a  Wolf  (Horata),  Good  Knife  (Tanatsuka),  Eagle  (Kitanemake),  and 
Flathead  (Estapa)  clan. 

1  Morgan,  (b),  part  n,  chapter  6. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 

According  to  Calf -woman,  the  Prairie-chicken  clan  is  the  most  important 
on  the  Reservation.  This  is  consistent  with  Mr.  Curtis's  data,  according 
to  which  the  larger  moiety  bears  the  name  of  this  clan,  corresponding  preemi 
nence  being  assigned  to  the  tami'sik  in  the  Three-clan  moiety.  It  should 
be  noted  that  the  Prairie-chicken  clan  is  the  only  one  common  to  the  Hidatsa 
and  Mandan  series. 

Calf-woman's  o're'  'kupa  (nite)  was  given  by  Turtle-woman  not  as  the 
designation  of  a  clan  but  of  all  the  seven  clans  jointly  in  addressing  the 
entire  tribe. 

Mr.  Curtis  states  that  the  marriage  of  fellow-clansmen  was  considered 
improper  and  publicly  ridiculed,  but  according  to  my  witnesses  this  rule 
has  long  ceased  to  be  absolute.  Thus,  Calf-woman  declared  that  some 
times  people  married  within  their  owrn  clan,  though  there  were  some  who 
regarded  this  as  wrong;  and  Two-chiefs,  a  maxi'  'kina  married  to  a  xtaxta', 
cited  the  case  of  her  husband's  mother  who  had  married  another  xtaxta', 
not  related  by  blood. 

KINSHIP  TERMS. 

A  brief  but  in  most  respects  accurate  statement  as  to  Mandan  kinship 
nomenclature  is  made  by  Maximilian.1  Recently  Mr.  Curtis  has  summarily 
characterized  the  Mandan  terminology  as  largely  influenced  by  the  clan 
factor,  the  father's  brother  and  his  clansmen  being  classed  with  the  father, 
the  father's  clanswomen  with  the  father's  sister,  all  mates  in  one's  clan  with 
brothers  and  all  females  as  mothers.2  This  statement  is  undoubtedly  in 
large  measure  correct,  but,  the  last  part  is  manifestly  not  to  be  taken  liter 
ally  since  the  mother's  mother  and  her  generation  and  the  sisters  are  cer 
tainly  not  called  "mother."  Morgan  already  had  to  contend  with  the 
difficulty  of  finding  interpreters  fully  conversant  with  Mandan  and  offers 
an  avowedly  imperfect  list.  So  far  as  essentials  are  concerned,  he  correctly 
characterizes  the  system  as  of  the  usual  classificatory  type.  The  most 
important  deviation  from  the  norm  mentioned  in  his  resume  consists  in  the 
classification  of  the  father's  sister  with  the  mother  in  feminine  parlance,  a 
distinctive  word  for  paternal  aunt  being  used  only  by  males.3  My  data 
yield  no  confirmation  of  this  peculiarity.  A  remarkable  feature  found  by 
Morgan  among  the  Hidatsa  and  Crow  but  not  noted  by  him  among  the 
Mandan,  though  recorded  both  by  Mr.  Curtis  and  myself,  is  the  confusion 
of  generations  in  the  designation  of  the  father's  sister's  female  descendants 


>  Maximilian,  n,  132,  543. 
'  Curtis,  v,   145. 
3  Morgan,  (a),  184. 


12  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI,. 

through  females,  all  these  relatives  being  classed  with  the  father's  sister 
regardless  of  generation.1  The  question  arises  whether  this  trait  was 
borrowed  by  the  Mandan,  possibly  since  their  practical  absorption  in  the 
neighboring  tribe.  Another  peculiarity  not  indicated  by  Morgan  in  his 
discussion  of  the  Mandan  system,  though  emphasized  in  his  treatment  of 
the  Hidatsa  and  Crow  terminologies,  is  the  classification  of  the  maternal 
uncle  with  the  elder  brother.  In  Mandan  this  is  optional  and  there  is  an 
alternative  specific  designation  for  the  mother's  brother,  while  Crow  and 
Hidatsa  lack  any  separate  word  for  this  relative.  From  the  great  rarity 
of  this  feature  and  the  simultaneous  use  of  a  distinct  word  for  the  mother's 
brother,  which  moreover  is  the  only  designation  given  by  Maximilian  and 
Morgan,  I  infer  that  the  Mandan  borrowed  from  the  Hidatsa  the  classifica 
tion  of  the  uncle  with  the  elder  brother.  This  seems  to  me  the  more  prob 
able  because  according  to  the  more  trustworthy  of  my  informants  the 
sister's  son  is  not  addressed  as  "younger  brother"  but  only  by  a  distinct 
term  correlative  with  that  for  mother's  brother.  But  the  Hidatsa  mode  of 
classifying  the  maternal  uncle  is  of  a  piece  with  the  Hidatsa  designation  of 
the  female  descendants  of  the  paternal  aunt,  i.  e.,  in  both  cases  the  same 
principle  of  emphasizing  clan  affiliation  to  the  extent  of  disregarding  genera 
tion  finds  expression.  It  is,  therefore,  likely  that  both  features  were  bor 
rowed  by  the  Mandan. 

With  the  aid  of  two  informants,  Two-chiefs  and  Calf-woman,  I  secured 
the  following  imperfect  list  of  kinship  terms. 

tate'  (vocative  only).     Father,  father's  brother,  father's  sister's  son. 

tate'xihe,  tate'xis  (voc.).  Father's  sister's  husband,  husband's  father, 
grandfather,  greatgrandfather. 

ma/ats,  tate'ena  (non-voc.).  Father,  father's  brother,  father's  sister's 
son. 

ma'txis  (non-voc.).     Father's  sister's  husband,  grandfather. 

ta  terite  (voc.).     My  fathers,  i.  e.,  my  father's  fellow-clansmen. 

n5'ato'oc  (non-voc.).     Father's  clansman  (man  speaking). 

no'atore  (non-voc.).     Father's  clansman  (woman  speaking). 

ptu  minike'  (voc.).  Father's  sister,  father's  sister's  daughter,  father's 
sister's  daughter's  daughter,  etc.,  ad  infinitum.  Non-voc.  form:  ptu'mini- 
ksevena. 

nae'  (voc.)      Mother,  mother's  sister,  father's  brother's  wife. 

na'xic,  na'xihe'  (voc.).     Grandmother,  husband's  mother. 

mihu'xis  (non-voc.).     Grandmother. 


1  Morgan's  schedules  regarding  the  descendants  of  the  father's  sister  are  blank  for  the 
Mandan,    (a),  322-330. 


1917.]  Lovrie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 

o'mihu'ruc  (non-voc.)-     Mother,  mother's  sister,  father's  brother's  wife. 

tawaratore'  (voc.)-  Mother's  brother  (see  p.  12  and  below).  Non-voc. 
form:  ta  waratose'  ena. 

pta'rumaks.     Mother's  brother  (w.  sp.).1 

miT  uka  (voc.,  m.  sp.).  My  elder  brother,  mother's  brother,  father's 
sister's  son's  son  older  than  ego,  father's  brother's  son  older  than  ego, 
mother's  sister's  son  older  than  ego.  Non-voc.  form:  muv  ukase' ena. 

micii  ka'.  My  younger  brother  (m.  sp.),  elder  or  younger  brother  (w. 
sp.) ;  father's  sister's  son's  son,  father's  brother's  son,  mother's  sister's  son. 

ptamihe'  (m.  sp.).  Elder  or  younger  sister,  father's  sister's  son's 
daughter,  father's  brother's  daughter,  mother's  sister's  daughter,  brother- 
in-law's  wife. 

miruke'  (w.  sp.).  Elder  sister,  father's  sister's  son's  daughter,  father's 
brother's  daughter,  mother's  sister's  daughter. 

pta/  ka'  (w.  sp.).  Younger  sister,  father's  sister's  son's  daughter,  father's 
brother's  daughter,  mother's  sister's  daughter. 

minike'  (voc.).  Son  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  brother's  son  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.), 
sister's  son  (w.  sp.),  mother's  brother's  son.  Non-voc.  form:  mini'ks. 

kunika'  (voc.).     Son,  grandson. 

minu'hake'  (voc.).  Daughter,  brother's  daughter  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.), 
mother's  brother's  daughter,  sister's  daughter  (w.  sp.).  Non-voc.  form: 
minu'haks. 

ptu'haxka'  (m.  sp.).     Sister's  son,  sister's  daughter. 

ptawj'  haka.     Grandchild,  son's  wife,  grandson's  wife. 

maratS  ka'  (voc.).     Husband,  wife.     Non-voc.  form:  ma  ratoka'se*  na. 

mi'morus  (non-voc.).     Husband,     ko'worus,  her  husband. 

noka  ka'  (voc.).     Wife,  husband.2 

mu'us  (non-voc.).     My  wife,  k'u'us;  k'u'uhe,  his  wife. 

e'  ecehak  (voc.).     Husband's  brother. 

nisi'ke.  Husband's  brother,  kocu'ka,  (probably)  her  husband's  brother. 
This  last  may  simply  mean  "his  brother." 

m5'  wa  'kihe'.     Wife's  brother,  sister's  husband  (m.  sp.). 

ptune'.     Brother's  wife  (w.  sp.),  husband's  sister. 

no'hakamihe.     Brother's  wife. 

mu'  uh5vrake  (m.  sp.).     My  brother's  wife. 

p't'  u'te,  p  'tuts.     Daughter's  husband. 


1  This  word  was  given  only  by  Calf-woman,  who  considered  mu'uka  as  the  corresponding 
male  term. 

2  One  informant  gave  maratoka  for  husband,  and  nokaka  for  wife,  the  other  reversed 
these  interpretations,  probably  there   arc  two  words  both  designating  the  spouse  regard 
less  of  sex. 


14  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

no'hakas.     Daughter's  husband. 

pta  +i'  maratokas.     My  wife's  father. 

ptu  hini  ks.     My  wife's  mother,  my  wife's  mother's  sister. 

It  will  be  noted  that  beyond  the  second  ascending  and  the  second  descending 
generations  no  relatives  are  designated  by  special  terms,  lineal  and  collateral  ancestors 
being  classed  with  grandparents  and  descendants  with  grandchildren,  regardless  of 
male  or  female  lines.  This  fact  is  borne  out  in  detail  by  Morgan's  schedules.  Ac 
cording  to  these,  it  would  appear  that  no  distinction  was  drawn  between  the  father's 
father's  and  the  mother's  mother's  sister,  nor  between  the  father's  father's  and  the 
mother's  mother's  brother.  On  the  latter  point  I  unfortunately  failed  to  get  data, 
which  would  have  been  of  interest  in  comparison  with  the  Hidatsa  usage  of  classing 
the  maternal  grandmother's  brother  with  the  elder  brother.  According  to  Morgan 
the  word  for  grandchild  was  also  applied  to  the  sister's  grandchild  (w.  sp.),  brother's 
grandchild  (m.  or  w.  sp.),  and  the  sister's  son's  wife  (m.  sp.). 

With  the  father  Morgan,' doubtless  correctly,  classes  the  mother's  sister's  husband 
and  the  stepfather.  His  identification  of  the  father's  sister  with  the  mother  in 
female  parlance,  however,  seems  doubtful  since  both  my  informants  were  women 
but  gave  a  single  word  for  the  paternal  aunt,  corresponding  to  one  of  Morgan's 
terms  for  male  usage.  A  second  word  given  by  Morgan  for  the  father's  sister  (m.  sp.) 
ma-sd-we,  is  not  Mandan  at  all  but  unmistakably  the  Hidatsa  baca'wi,  which  is  used 
by  both  sexes.  On  the  other  hand,  Morgan  has  only  the  equivalent  of  td,  waratort' 
for  the  maternal  uncle,  while  I  also  obtained  a  distinct  word  for  women's  use  as  well 
as  the  classification  with  the  elder  brother  (by  men  only?). 

Except  for  the  applications  already  mentioned,  my  connotations  for  the  elder 
brother  term  closely  coincide  with  Morgan's,  which  is  also  essentially  true  of  the 
younger  brother  category.  The  essential  point  here  is  that  women  have  a  single 
term  for  elder  and  younger  brother  coinciding  with  the  men's  word  for  younger 
brother,  the  men  having  an  additional  term  for  the  elder  brother. 

In  the  designation  of  sisters  there  is  only  partial  parallelism.  To  be  sure,  the 
women  (i.  e.,  members  of  the  sex  of  the  person  designated)  have  two  distinct  words 
for  elder  and  younger  sister,  while  the  men  have  only  one.  The  men's  generic  term, 
however,  does  not  coincide  with  either  of  the  women's  words  so  that  there  are  not 
two  words  but  three  to  be  reckoned  with.  Here  Morgan  agrees  as  regards  the  men's 
word,  but  differs  in  ascribing  a  single  generic  term  to  the  women.  Analogy,  not 
only  with  the  brother  terms  but  also  with  the  usage  of  other  Siouan  tribes,  such  as 
the  Winnebago,  strongly  suggests  that  Morgan  is  in  error. 

My  list  contains  two  words  for  son  without  clear  differentiation.  Morgan 
practically  restricts  minike  to  male  and  kunika'  entirely  to  female  speech.  The 
latter  word  is  also  translated  by  him  to  cover  the  brother's  son,  sister's  son,  father's 
brother's  son's  son,  mother's  sister's  son's  son  and  mother's  sister's  daughter's  son, — 
all  with  a  woman  speaking.  He  interprets  minikf'  to  cover  the  son,  brother's  son, 
father's  brother's  son's  son,  mother's  son's  son  and  stepson  in  male  speech,  and  the 
stepson  and  father's  brother's  daughter's  son  in  female  speech.  The  two  last- 
mentioned  meanings  are  not  very  convincing;  more  particularly,  the  father's  brother's 
daughter  being  classed  with  the  sister,  her  son  would  logically  be  a  sister's  son,  i.  e., 
a  "son"  for  women  according  to  the  usual  classificatory  rules,  and  it  is  not  at  all  clear 
why  this  particular  "son"  should  be  distinguished  from  others  by  substituting  a 
word  ordinarily  confined  to  male  usage.  It  is  further  strange  that  a  woman  should 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  15 

use  a  single  word  for  brother's  and  sister's  son.  On  the  other  hand,  my  own  list  of 
meanings  for  minike  is  rendered  somewhat  doubtful  by  extending  the  word  to  the 
brother's  son  of  both  men  and  women.  A  similar  feature  of  the  daughter  category, 
however,  viz.,  the  classing  of  the  man's  brother's  daughter  with  the  woman's,  is 
supported  by  Morgan's  as  well  as  my  own  informants. 

One  of  my  words  for  husband,  ml'  morus,  is  approached  by  Morgan's  me-mer-ul, 
while  his  moo-hul  and  his  moo-ha  for  wife  and  brother's  wife  are  at  least  of  the  same 
stem  as  my  mu~  us  and  mu'  uho^ake  (m.  sp.).  I  did  not  get  the  words  by  which 
the  wife's  and  the  husband's  fathers  and  mothers  address  each  other,  but  analogy 
with  other  Siouan  systems  supports  Morgan's  statement  that  there  are  distinct 
terms,  which  he  gives  as  kote'-he-a  for  the  father-in-law  and  me-ho-he-a  for  the  mother- 
in-law.  My  list  also  lacks  a  word  for  wife's  sister,  which  Morgan  gives  as  noo-ko- 
ho-mus. 

Instead  of  koo-too' '-min-ik  I  have  ptune'  for  brother's  wife  (w.  sp.);  Morgan's 
informants,  consistently  enough,  included  under  his  term  the  father's  brother's  son's 
and  the  mother's  sister's  son's  wife.  In  my  list  the  husband's  sister  is  put  into  this 
category. 

To  my  p't'u'te  for  daughter's  husband  clearly  corresponds  Morgan's  p'too'-ta, 
brother's  daughter's  husband  (m.  sp.),  which  indicates  that  his  ko-too'-te  is  merely 
a  form  of  the  same  stem.  He  gives  many  connotations  for  this  word,  none  of  which 
(except  son-in-law)  is  given  in  my  series.  Thus,  Morgan,  translates  it  also  "  husband's 
father"  and  "husband's  mother"  and  reciprocally  "daughter-in-law"  (m.  sp.  and 
w.  sp.),  but  here  judging  from  analogy,  he  is  almost  certainly  wrong,  the  latter 
relative  being  classed  with  the  grandchild,  the  parents-in-law  with  the  grandparents, 
as  my  list  indicates.  Consistently  with  his  classification  of  the  brother's  with  the 
sister's  daughter  (w.  sp.)  and  with  the  customary  classificatory  extensions,  Morgan 
further  lists  under  the  same  caption  the  brother's  son's  wife,  brother's  daughter's 
husband  (w.  sp.),  sister's  son's  wife  (w.  sp.)  and  sister's  daughter's  husband  (w.  sp.). 
Of  these  meanings  only  those  applied  to  men  are  compatible  with  my  data. 

My  mo'  wa'k  i  ke',  wife's  brother,  sister's  husband  (m.  sp.)  is  phonetically  the 
equivalent  of  Morgan's  wo-wd'  ke-a  and  wo-wa-ke.  He  gives  various  additional 
meanings,  viz.,  sister's  husband  (w.  sp.),  husband's  brother,  sister's  daughter's 
husband  (m.  sp.),  father's  brother's  daughter's  and  mother's  sister's  daughter's 
husband.  The  two  last-mentioned  meanings  follow  of  course  from  the  meaning 
"sister's  husband."  That  a  woman  should  call  the  sister's  husband  by  the  same 
term  applied  by  a  man  to  his  brother-in-law,  seems  rather  improbable,  but  un 
fortunately  I  did  not  get  evidence  on  this  point.  On  the  other  hand,  I  have  two 
distinct  terms  for  the  husband's  brother,  so  that  in  this  respect  Morgan's  data  seem 
inaccurate.  Altogether  it  is  regrettable  that  the  terms  of  affinity  are  involved  in  so 
much  doubt. 

SOCIAL  CUSTOMS. 

On  this  subject  I  only  collected  a  few  items,  some  of  which,  however, 
are  of  some  comparative  interest. 

As  among  the  Hidatsa  and  Crow,  there  was  a  joking-relationship,  which 
obtained  among  the  sons  and  daughters  of  men  belonging  to  the  same  clan. 
These  relatives,  if  such  they  may  be  styled,  were  called  I'irusit. 


16  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

Regarding  cross-cousin  marriage,  Two-chiefs  said  that  it  was  permissible 
for  a  man  to  marry  the  daughter  of  a  mother's  clansman  but  not  the  daughter 
of  a  mother's  own  brother.  On  the  other  hand,  Turtle-woman  declared  that 
it  was  proper  for  a  girl  to  marry  her  father's  sister's  son,  and  my  Hidatsa 
interpreter  explained  that  this  was  a  point  in  which  Mandan  and  Hidatsa 
practices  diverged. 

Not  only  the  wfe's  mother  but  also  the  mother-in-law's  sisters  and 
mother  avoided  the  husband. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  17 


SOCIAL    LIFE    OF    THE    HIDATSA. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The  Hidatsa  (Minitari,  Gros  Ventre  of  the  Missouri)  form,  with  the 
closely  related  Crow  Indians,  a  distinct  branch  of  the  Siouan  family.  They 
now  reside  on  the  Fort  Berthold  Reservation  in  North  Dakota,  which  they 
share  with  the  Mandan  and  Arikara.  According  to  the  census  of  1910  they 
number  547. 

Before  the  smallpox  epidemic  of  1837  the  Hidatsa  were  settled  in  three 
villages  on  the  Knife  River,  which  they  occupied  at  least  as  early  as  1796 
and  where  they  were  visited  by  Lewis  and  Clark's  expedition,  by  Catlin, 
and  by  Maximilian.  By  far  the  largest  of  these  villages  was  that  called 
Hira'tsa,  which  in  Maximilian's  day  included  over  eighty  earth-lodges; 
it  was  situated  on  the  north  bank,  about  three  miles  from  the  Missouri. 
Both  the  others  were  on  the  south  side, —  Awatixa'ati  half  a  mile  above  the 
mouth  of  the  Knife  and  Awaxa'wi  at  the  embouchure.  The  former  was 
made  up  of  about  forty,  and  the  latter  of  eighteen  earth-lodges.  Maxi 
milian  estimated  the  total  population  at  between  2,100  and  2,200^  Tradi 
tion  speaks  of  two  additional  sites,  those  of  Xu'ra  and  Awati'd,  which  are 
referred  to  as  constituting  with  the  foregoing  the  "Five  Villages." 

The  Awaxa'wi  language  differed  dialectically  from  that  of  the  Hidatsa. 
proper.  To  illustrate  this  point  Buffalo-bird-woman  told  the  following 
story.  An  Awaxa'wi  and  an  Hidatsa  once  went  looking  for  buffalo.  The 
Hidatsa  said,  "There's  a  bull."  The  Awaxa'wi  answered,  "awaka'ts," 
which  meant  "I  see  it"  in  his  dialect2  but  "It  is  a  badger"  in  Hidatsa. 
The  Hidatsa  said,  "No,  it  is  not  a  badger."  They  had  a  dispute  about  it 
and  soon  came  to  blows. 

Owing  to  the  ravages  of  the  smallpox  epidemic  the  three  villages  were 
consolidated  into  one,  and  accordingly  it  is  impossible  nowadays  to  get 
first-hand  data  as  to  the  relations  of  the  three  villages  when  they  repre 
sented  distinct  communities.  Several  individuals  are  remembered  as 
belonging  to  the  Awaxa'wi,  among  them  Poor-wolf,  Small-ankle,  and  June- 
berry.  Marriages  are  said  to  have  taken  place  both  within  and  without  the 
village  group.  Maximilian  enumerates  distinct  chiefs  for  each  village,  and 


1  Maximilian,  n,  212  f. ;   Matthews,  15,  38;    Handbook,  art.  "Hidatsa." 

2  Tn  Hidatsa  the  accent  is  on  the  second  syllable  of  aira'kats. 


18  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

I  have  little  doubt  that  the  villages  were  independent  of  one  another.  There 
is  no  question  that  there  were  slight  cultural  differences.  Thus,  I  was  told 
that  the  miraraxuxi  society  l  was  confined  to  the  Awaxa'wi,  and  peculiari 
ties  of  this  sort  might  be  inferred  by  analogy  from  the  Mandan  conditions, 
for  as  we  have  seen  the  Nu'pta  had  developed  certain  specific  traits  in 
Maximilian's  time. 

GOVERNMENT. 

For  reasons  already  given  it  is  impossible  to  understand  fully  the  political 
relations  of  the  several  villages  prior  to  consolidation.  We  may  reasonably 
assume  that  they  formed  uniformly  friendly  and  autonomous  groups  corre 
sponding  to  the  local  bands  of  nomadic  Plains  tribes. 

The  form  of  internal  government  in  a  village  is  likewise  not  quite  clear. 
My  principal  informant  introduced  the  concept  of  the  "winter  chief," 
whose  term  of  office  began  in  the  fall  when  the  leaves  turned  yellow  and 
expired  with  the  melting  of  the  snow.  According  to  this  witness  a  new 
winter  village  was  built  every  year.  The  winter  chief  was  a  man  associated 
with  some  medicine  bundle,  but  as  to  the  exact  method  of  his  selection  no 
data  were  obtained.  When  chosen  he  put  a  pipe  before  his  bundle  and 
prayed.  He  often  prayed  thus  during  his  term  of  office.  He  was  responsi 
ble  for  the  safety  and  welfare  of  the  people.  On  the  other  hand,  he  was 
entitled  to  credit  if  the  buffalo  were  abundant  and  if  many  enemies  were 
killed  during  his  incumbency.  In  fact,  he  was  permitted  to  reckon  as  his 
own  any  war  honors  won  during  this  period.  Sometimes  there  was  no  chief 
because  the  man  chosen  was  unwilling  to  risk  the  responsibilities  of  the 
position.  The  ideal  chief  seems  to  have  been  a  man  of  general  benevolence 
who  offered  smoke  to  the  old  people  and  feasted  the  poor. 

My  informant  recounted  the  chiefs  for  every  year  from  about  1845  to 
1875.  I  got  the  impression  that  this  was  the  Hidatsa  method  of  designating 
years,  corresponding  to  the  Crow  scheme  of  denoting  each  year  by  some 
significant  happening.2  The  names  of  the  Hidatsa  chiefs  were  sometimes 
but  by  no  means  always  followed  by  a  statement  as  to  some  important 
occurrence,  e.  g.,  "Four-fingers,  a  Sioux  was  killed  that  winter;"  "Long- 
hairs,  many  buffalo  came  to  the  village." 

I  neither  discovered  how  the  village  was  governed  during  the  summer  nor 
what  was  the  position  of  the  retired  chief.  As  regards  Big-cloud  (about 
1845),  who  is  said  to  have  conducted  the  movement  to  Fort  Berthold,  I  got 


1  Lowie,   (d),  237. 

2  Lowie,   (c),  242. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  19 

the  information  that  he  was  entitled  to  honor  marks  in  the  summer  as  well 
as  in  the  winter  and  indeed  remained  a  chief  all  his  life.  The  latter  state 
ment  may  simply  mean  that  he  remained  always  a  man  of  distinction,  but 
since  he  is  mentioned  as  the  leader  of  many  war  parties  his  social  status  may 
have  been  the  result  of  his  martial  record  rather  than  of  his  former  chief 
taincy. 

The  power  of  policing  the  village  was  vested  in  the  Black  Mouth  society, 
one  of  the  age-organizations,  whose  activities  have  been  fully  described  in  a 
previous  publication.1  Their  principal  functions  were  twofold.  They 
superintended  the  communal  buffalo  hunt  so  as  to  prevent  the  premature 
stampeding  of  the  herd;  and  they  attempted  to  remove  any  misunder 
standings  among  fellow-villagers.  Thus,  if  an  Hidatsa  had  killed  another, 
the  relatives  of  the  slain  man  might  plot  revenge;  but  the  Black  Mouths 
would  gather  together  property  and  offer  it  to  the  aggrieved  people,  fill  a 
pipe  for  them  to  smoke,  and  by  gentle  words  would  conciliate  them  and 
cause  them  to  give  up  projects  of  revenge. 


MOIETIES  AND  CLANS. 

The  Hidatsa  are  divided  into  seven  matrilineal  clans,  grouped  in  the 
Four-clan  (nd'ki  to'pa)  and  the  Three-clan  (na'ki  ra'ivi)  moieties  as 
follows : — 

Four-Clan  Moiety. 

tsl'tska  ru'pa'ke,  Prairie-chicken  people 
awa'xe  ra/wita,  ? 

miripa/ti,  Real  Water 
i'ticuxke,  Wide  Butte 

Three-Clan  Moiety. 

maxo'xati,  ? 

me'e  tsiro'ka,  Knife  people.2 

ap'u'  'ka  mika',  Lower  Cap 

These  moieties  and  clans  were  represented  in  each  of  the  old  Hidatsa 
villages. 

Morgan 3  does  not  speak  of  the  dual  division  but  lists  the  seven  clans  as 
given  above,  his  Hidatsa  words  being  clearly  the  equivalents  of  mine.  His 


1  Lowie,   (d),  274. 

2  The  native  word  was  said  to  belong  to  the  old  Hidatsa  language. 
*  (b),  part  2,  chapter  6. 


20  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

translations  differ  to  some  extent,  being  the  following:  Prairie-chicken, 
Unknown-animal,  Water,  Hill-people,  Lodge,  Knife,  Bonnet. 

The  clan  origin  legends  I  was  able  to  get  are  of  the  trivial  character 
typical  of  the  corresponding  Crow  traditions.  It  is  said  that  a  few  young 
men  on  a  war  party  stopped  over  night  among  some  macugdkca  bushes, 
such  as  the  prairie-chickens  frequent.  Accordingly,  the  rest  of  the  people 
called  them  "Prairie-chickens."  This  story,  like  the  comparable  Crow 
Indian  tales,  naively  ignores  the  fact  of  maternal  descent.  The  name 
iniripd'ti  is  said  to  refer  to  Devil's  Lake.  When  the  people  of  this  clan  were 
asked  by  the  other  Hidatsa  where  they  came  from,  they  replied  "Real 
Water,"  meaning  the  lake  mentioned.  A  second  explanation  of  the  name 
was  obtained.  Some  miripd'ti  had  killed  one  of  their  clan.  They  moved 
away  and  built  a  village  of  their  own  on  the  site  of  the  old  Hidatsa  village  of 
Xu'ra.  They  were  afraid  to  go  out  in  the  dark  because  of  the  relatives  of 
the  murdered  man,  so  they  kept  a  large  supply  of  water  for  the  night.  One 
of  them  kept  water  in  a  paunch.  This  man  said,  "  Well,  I  am  afraid  to  go 
outside,  so  I  keep  this  water,  but  now  I  don't  want  to  drink."  So  he  ran 
his  knife  through  the  paunch  and  the  water  flowed  out.  His  clan  was 
therefore  called  miripa'tahc,  Punching-water,  which  name  was  afterwards 
altered  to  miripd'ti. 

The  Prairie-chicken  people  did.  not  consider  prairie-chickens  as  sacred 
in  any  way  except  if  a  clansman  had  chanced  to  see  one  in  a  vision.  Then 
he  would  pray  to  it  and  would  not  kill  it  under  normal  conditions;  but  if 
hungry  he  would  do  so. 

Each  clan  wished  to  establish  a  reputation  for  bravery.  Fellow-mem 
bers  tried  to  dissuade  one  another  from  disgraceful  doings,  of  which  all  had 
to  bear  the  blame.  Thus,  if  a  Prairie-chicken  man  had  committed  murder, 
his  clansmen  were  all  ashamed  for  other  people  would  say,  "The  Prairie- 
chickens  are  murderers." 

The  clans  were  exogamous  but  the  subjective  attitude  towards  infrac 
tions  of  the  rule  seems  to  have  been  even  milder  than  among  the  Crow.1 
They  were  regarded  as  improper  but  not  as  shockingly  unethical.  Thus, 
Wolf-chief  said  that  while  very  few  married  within  the  clan  the  other  people 
would  simply  comment  on  it  by  saying,  "They  like  each  other,  we  can't 
help  it."  According  to  another  informant,  a  man  who  married  a  woman  of 
his  clan  was  called  maru'  *ta,  "foolish,"  or  ?/  rooca  ltsac,  "belonging  to  the 
same  group,"  by  his  joking-relatives  but  others  would  not  take  any  notice 
of  his  actions.  If  a  Prairie-chicken  man  married  a  Mandan  woman  of  this 
clan,  there  was  no  objection  even  on  the  part  of  the  maktitsaii.  The  children 

i  Lowie,  (c),  188  f. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  21 

of  an  endogamous  Prairie-chicken  clan  union  were  called  tsi'  Is  ka(a)waxe, 
"Prairie-chicken  high  hill";  the  informant  thought  in  the  old  language  the 
word  was  aicaxai.  No  further  explanation  was  secured. 

The  relations  obtaining  among  members  of  the  same  clan  and  opposite 
sex  are  comparable  to  those  between  brother  and  sister.  The  clanswomen 
would  make  quillwork,  shirts,  leggings,  moccasins,  and  robes  for  a  clan 
brother,  and  hand  them  to  him,  saying,  "Brother,  I  bring  this  for  you." 
In  return  they  would  be  presented  with  a  horse. 

When  an  Hidatsa  marries  a  Mandan,  the  children  are  members  of  the 
mother's  clan  and  tribe.  In  the  relatively  far  rarer  cases  of  marriage  with 
an  Arikara  woman,  the  children  would  of  course  be  Arikara;  they  would 
not  be  affiliated  with  any  Hidatsa  clan  unless  they  were  adopted. 

Buffalo-bird-woman's  maternal  grandmother  once  bought  a  little  Crow 
girl  for  a  horse  and  plenty  of  goods.  She  adopted  her  as  a  daughter,  thus 
making  her  a  Prairie-chicken,  whereby  the  Crow  woman's  children  also 
became  Prairie-chickens.  If  a  woman  of  another  tribe  married  into  a 
polygamous  household,  she  was  reckoned  of  the  same  clan  as  the  other 
wives  (who  were  usually  sisters). 

The  moieties  had  no  marriage-regulating  functions.  This  statement 
rests  on  explicit  dicta  of  the  natives  and  is  also  borne  out  by  the  list  of 
marriages.  Further,  the  dual  division  does  not  seem  to  have  had  any 
connection  with  athletic  games. 

Though  it  is  not  easy  fully  to  comprehend  the  nature  of  the  Hidatsa 
moieties,  it  is  clear  that  their  functions  were  in  part  political.  Whenever 
matters  of  tribal  moment  were  to  be  debated,  the  grouping  of  men  was  based 
on  the  dual  division.  This  happened,  for  example,  when  treaties  were 
concluded  with  the  United  States.  In  such  a  case,  either  moiety  as  a  body 
might  agree  to  abide  by  the  decision  reached  by  the  other.  A  similar  ar 
rangement  was  said  to  exist  nowadays  between  the  Mandan  and  Hidatsa. 
\Vhen  the  government  issued  calicoes,  the  Hidatsa  also  divided  into  two 
groups.  Then  the  Four-clans  might  say,  "Three-clans,  take  this  pile;  we 
Four-clans  shall  take  the  remainder."  Being  more  numerous,  the  Four- 
clan  people  would  get  a  somewrhat  larger  share. 

In  the  old  days  each  moiety  had  its  own  territory  for  eagle-hunting, 
and  the  complementary  moiety  was  forbidden  to  hunt  eagles  or  use  the  pits 
there. 

Big-cloud,  Bobtail-bull,  and  Cherry -necklace,  all  members  of  the  Three- 
clan  moiety,  wrere  chiefs,  but  there  were  more  chiefs  belonging  to  the 
Four-clans.  To  what  extent  this  was  connected  with  the  numerical  pre 
ponderance  of  this  moiety,  it  is  impossible  to  say  definitely. 

Judging  from  the  frequency  of  references  to  the  moieties  by  the  natives, 


22  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

I  believe  that  they  loomed  as  important  divisions  in  their  consciousness. 
Nevertheless  it  seems  reasonably  certain  that  their  antiquity  is  not  so  great 
as  that  of  the  clans.  The  complete  absence  of  any  trace  of  moieties  among 
the  Crow  seems  decisive  on  this  point,  while  the  clan  concept  of  the  two 
tribes  practically  coincides,  as  do  their  notions  as  to  the  functions  of  the 
father's  clan.  In  short,  vital  features  of  Hidatsa  social  organization  are 
shared  by  the  Crow.  If  the  moiety  division  is  an  ancient  Hidatsa  institu 
tion,  why  do  we  fail  to  find  even  a  trace  of  it  among  the  Crow?  This 
argument  is  strengthened  by  the  evidence  afforded  by  the  kinship  nomen 
clature.  Abundant  proof  exists  for  the  influence  of  the  clan  organization 
on  kinship  terms,  but  I  fail  to  find  a  trace  of  the  specific  effects  of  a  dual  or 
ganization,  whether  we  assume  that  exogamy  was  or  was  not  at  one  time 
associated  with  the  moieties.  In  an  exogamous  moiety  system,  e.  g.,  the 
two  types  of  cross-cousins,  father's  sister's  and  mother's  brother's  child, 
are  of  the  same  moiety;  yet  we  shall  see  that  these  types  are  sharply  dis 
tinguished  in  Hidatsa  by  a  difference  of  generations.  Again  the  mother's 
brother  is  not  classed  with  the  father's  sister's  husband,  after  the  manner  of 
some  tribes  where  this  feature  is  possibly  associated  with  the  dual  organiza 
tion.  Finally,  it  may  be  noted  that  while  fellow-members  of  one's  clan  are 
"brothers"  and  "sisters,"  these  terms  are  not  extended  to  members  of  the 
same  moiety  if  of  a  different  clan.  The  only  statement  to  the  contrary 
which  I  obtained  by  its  weakness  really  bears  out  my  point:  it  was  said 
that  members  of  one  moiety  were  friends,  a  kind  of  brothers.  There  is 
indeed,  proof  that  certain  social  practices  hold  for  the  larger  division.  For 
example,  I  was  told  that  when  presents  were  received  by  Four-clan  people 
from  their  clan  sons  and  daughters,  they  called  together  all  the  other  mem 
bers  of  the  moiety  and  distributed  their  gifts  among  them.  As  shown 
elsewhere,  the  joking-relationship  likewise  extended,  at  least  in  some  meas 
ure,  to  the  children  of  the  moiety  members.  Nevertheless,  in  almost  all 
such  cases  the  indications  are  that  we  are  dealing  with  an  extension  from  the 
smaller  to  the  larger  group.  In  other  instances,  a  usage  is  definitely  asso 
ciated  with  the  clan  and  only  the  clan.  Thus,  if  a  man  struck  a  coup,  only 
members  of  his  own  clan  rejoiced.  Finally  the  lack  of  distinctive  names  for 
the  moieties  may  be  regarded  as  corroborative  testimony.  Taken  in  con 
nection  with  the  various  reasons  already  adduced,  it  suggests  that  the 
moieties  developed  historically  as  combinations  of  several  clans. 

A  clan  census  was  taken  with  the  main  purpose  of  determining  what 
clans  had  intermarried.     The  results  are  the  following:  — 

Joe  Packincau,  Lower  Cap;  wife,  Arikara. 

Skunk,  Lower  Cap;   wife,  Arikara. 

Juneberry,  Lower  Cap;   husband  (dead),  Knife. 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 

Otter,  Lower  Cap;   husband  (Bad-brave),  Knife. 

Dancing,  Lower  Cap;    husband  (Young-wolf),  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

I'tsi  kiv  kic,  Lower  Cap;   unmarried;   son  of  Bad-brave,  Knife. 

Medicine-crow,  Lower  Cap;  wife,  Three-clan  moiety,  clan  not  known  to  informant. 

Many-sweet-grasses,  Lower  Cap;    husband  (Sand,  dead),  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

Frank  Packineau,  Lower  Cap;  wife,  Mandan  of  clan  not  known  to  informant. 

Tall-woman,  Lower  Cap;   husband,  Standing  Rock  Agency  Dakota. 

Hairy-coat,  Real  Water;    wife,  Mandan. 

Looking-for-water,  Prairie-chicken;  husband  (Crow-arm),  Mandan  of  Three-clan 
moiety. 

Son-of-star,  Knife;    wife  (Buffalo-bird-woman),  Prairie-chicken. 

Ooke'  wlva  (Hair-ornament-woman),  maxo'xati  clan;  husband  (Crow-flies-high), 
awdxe  ra'wita;  father,  Prairie-chicken. 

Drags-wolf,  Real  Water;  wife  (Prairie-dog-woman),  Prairie-chicken. 

Spotted-horn  (son  of  6Yoke'  wa),  rnaxoxati;  wife  (Other-comes-out),  Prairie- 
chicken. 

Many-women,  Knife;   husband  (Kidney),  awdxe  ra'wita. 

Old-white-man,  maxo'xati;  wife,  Mandan. 

Butterfly,  Real  Water;    wife,  Mandan. 

Poor-wolf,  Real  Water;   wife,  Knife. 

Dancing-bull,  Prairie-chicken;  wife,    Mandan. 

Fast-dog,  maxS'xati;   wife,  Prairie-chicken. 

Spotted-rabbit,  awdxe  ra'wita;   wife,  Prairie-chicken. 

Hard-horn,  awdxe  ra'wita;   wife,  Knife. 

James  Horn,  awdxe  ra'wita,  wife,  Knife. 

No-arm,  maxo'xati;   wife,  awdxe  ra'wita. 

Biscuit,  Prairie-chicken;   wife,  Knife. 

Sitting-owl,  Knife;   wife,  awdxe  ra'wita. 

Foolish-bear,  Wide  Butte;   wife,  awdxe  ra'wita. 

George  Elk,  Wide  Butte;   wife,  Mandan. 

George  Blackhawk,  Wide  Butte;   wife,  Prairie-chicken. 

Bull's-eye,  Wide  Butte;   wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

Spotted-wolf,  awdxe  ra'wita;   wife,  Prairie-chicken. 

Thomas  Spotted-wrolf,  Knife;   wife,  Three-clan  moiety. 

Young-bird,  Knife;   wife,  Three-clan  moiety. 

Yellow-wolf,  maxS'xati;   wife,  Knife. 

James  Baker,  Knife;   wife,  Mandan. 

Lewis  Baker,  Knife;  wife,  awdxe  ra'wita. 

Percy  Baker,  Knife;   wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

Willy  Hale,  maxo'xati;  wife,  Real  W'ater. 

Arthur  Mandan,  Prairie-chicken. 

White-finger-nail,  Knife;    wife,  Mandan. 

Coffee,  Real  Water;   wife,  Knife.1 

Francis  Charging,  Knife;   wife,  Prairie-chicken. 

Bird-bear,  awdxe  ra'wita;    wife,  Mandan. 

Harry  Eaton,  Knife;   wife,  Prairie-chicken. 


1   The  informant  was  not  sure  of  the  clan,  but  felt  certain  that  Coffee's  wife  was  of  the 
Three-clan  moiety. 


Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

Little-wolf,  Knife;    wife,  Arikara. 

Young-bear,  awraxe  ra'wita;  wife,  Dakota. 

Front-coyote,  awaxe  ra'wita;  wife,  Mandan. 

Peter  Standish,  Three-clan  moiety;   wife,  Mandan. 

Walks,  Three-clan  moiety;   wife,  Mandan,  Prairie-chicken. 

Henry  Bad-gun,  Knife;   wife,  Knife. 

Lean-bear,  Knife;    wife,  Knife. 

Robert  Lincoln,  Prairie-chicken;   wife,  Knife. 

Sam  Jones  (=  Left-hand-bull),  Real  Water;  wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

Crow-bull,  Real  Water;  wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

Black-mountain-lion,  Knife;    wife,  Prairie-chicken. 

Phillip  Atkins,  Knife;   wife,  Real  Water. 

Foolish-wolf,  awaxe  ra'wita;    wife,  Arikara. 

Holding-eagle,  Prairie-chicken;   wife,  Mandan. 

Watkins,  Prairie-chicken;    unmarried. 

William  Coghlan,  Real  Water;  unmarried. 

Louis  His-horse-is-red,  Real  Water;  wife,  Wide  Butte. 

Dan  Wolf,  Real  Water;   wife,  Dakota. 

Good-bear,  Real-water;   wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

Buffalo-paunch,  Real  Water;   wife,  awaxe  ra'wita. 

Wolf -chief,  Prairie-chicken;   wife,  Mandan. 

Bear-arm,  Knife;  wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

Old-dog,  Three-clan  moiety  (probably  Knife) ;  wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

White-duck,  Three-clan  moiety  (probably  Knife);  wife,  Knife. 

Stick-face,  Prairie-chicken;    wife,  Mandan. 

Rabbit-head,  Knife;    wife,  Knife. 

White-face,  Knife;    wife,  Arikara. 

Pan,  awaxe  ra'wita;  wife,  Lower  Cap. 

Rabbit-above,  Prairie-chicken;   wife,  Real  Water. 

Conrad  Smith,  Prairie-chicken;   wife,  awaxe  ra'wdta. 

Bears-in-water,  Lower  Cap;  wife,  Three-clan  moiety  (Knife?). 

Harry  Savings,  Knife;  wife,  Mandan  Prairie-chicken. 

William  Dean,  Lower  Cap;  wife,  Arikara. 

Stanley  Dean,  Lower  Cap ;  wife,  Three-clan  moiety. 

Mike  Bassett,  Real  Water;  wife,  Three-clan  moiety. 

Big-head,  Three-clan  moiety;    wife,  Prairie-chicken. 

Old-male-black-bear,  awaxe  ra'wita;   wife,  Three-clan  moiety. 

One-feather,  awaxe  ra'wita;  wife,  Wide  Butte. 

Carl  Withman,  Three-clan  moiety;   wife,  Mandan. 

Sam  Newman,  Three-clan  moiety  (because  his  Arikara  mother  joined  Three-clan 

moiety) ;   wife,  Arikara. 

Many-shrines,  awaxe  ra'wita;   husband,  (Bear's  necklace),  Prairie-chicken. 
First-squash-blossom,  awaxe  ra'wita;    husband  (Bobtail-bull),  Knife. 
Skunk-woman,  Knife;    no  husband. 
Many-woman,  Knife;  husband  (Kidney),  awdxe  ra'wita. 
Marakapec,  Knife;   husband,  Lower  Cap. 
Woman-bear,  Prairie-chicken;  husband,  Lower  Cap. 
Buffalo-woman,  Prairie-chicken;    husband,  Knife. 
Takes-out,  Real  Water;   husband,  Knife. 
Cold-medicine,  Knife;    husband,  Knife. 


1917.] 


Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 


25 


Yellow-top,  Real  Water;   husband,  awaxe  ra'wita. 
His-cherry,  Real  Water;   husband,  awaxe  ra'wita. 
Juneberry,  Knife;   husband,  awaxe  ra'wita. 
Not-woman,  Knife;   husband,  Mandan. 

Different-snake,  Knife;   husband,  (Prairie-chicken),  Mandan. 
Grows-on-water,  Knife;   husband,  Real  Water. 
Corn-stalk,  Knife;  husband  (Two-hearts),  awaxe  ra'wita. 
All-blossom,  Real- Water;    husband,  (Black-chest),  Mandan. 
Woman-in-water,  Knife;    husband,  Mandan. 

Of  the  153  adult  Hidatsa  (living  and  dead)  listed  above,  the  clan  affilia 
tions  are  as  follows :  Prairie-chicken,  26;  awaxe  ra'wita,  26 ;  Real  Water  21; 
Wide  Butte,  6;  maxo'xati,  7;  Knife,  51;  Lower  Cap  16.  The  total  for 
the  Four-clan  people  is  accordingly  79,  for  the  Three-clans  74. 

In  the  following  table  the  data  bearing  on  intermarriages  of  clans  are 
presented,  the  method  adopted  being  essentially  that  suggested  by  Dr.  A.  A. 
Goldenweiser.1  Since  the  order  of  the  spouses  in  the  preceding  list  is 


Prairie-      awdxe         Real         Wide       maxo'-  Lower 

chicken     ra'wita      Water      Butte         xati         Knife         Cap 


awdxe  ra'wita 


Knife 


Lower  Cap 


0 

4 

1 

3 

7 

5 

4               0 

3 

2 

2 

9 

1 

2 

3 

0 

1 

1 

5 

0 

1 

2 

1 

o 

0 

0 

0 

3 

2 

1 

0 

0 

1 

0 

7 

9 

5 

0 

1 

4 

5 

5 

1 

0 

0 

0 

5 

0 

1  Goldenweiser,   284. 


26  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

immaterial,  the  vertical  and  the  horizontal  columns  ought  to  give  identical 
figures,  which  of  course  implies  duplication.  That  is  to  say,  the  number  of 
marriages  between,  say,  the  Prairie-chickens  and  the  Real  Waters  is  re 
corded  in  the  third  square  of  the  first  horizontal  column  but  also  in  the  third 
square  of  the  first  vertical  column,  and  so  forth.  Marriages  with  foreigners 
have  been  disregarded,  and  a  zero  indicates  that  no  marriage  between  the 
two  clans  in  question  is  on  record. 

Small  as  is  the  total  number  of  marriages  recorded,  certain  interesting 
facts  develop  from  this  tabulation.  For  one  thing,  the  only  cases  of  non- 
exogamous  unions,  four  in  all,  occur  in  the  Knife  clan.  Secondly,  the  non- 
exogamous  nature  of  the  moieties  is  clearly  shown.  Of  the  fifty-six  marriages 
recorded,  twenty-three  took  place  within  the  moiety, —  thirteen  among  the 
Four-clan  and  ten  among  the  Three-clan  people.  Each  of  the  clans  of  the 
former  moiety  has  intermarried  with  the  three  other  clans  of  the  same 
moiety.  In  the  Three-clan  moiety  there  is  no  record  of  an  intra-moiety 
marriage  between  the  maxo'xati  and  Lower  Cap  clans,  but  this  must  be  due 
merely  to  the  small  number  of  maxo'xati  people  since  there  is  also  no  case 
of  their  intermarrying  with  the  Wide  Butte  of  the  complementary  division, 
while  an  instance  occurs  of  a  maxo'xati  marrying  a  Knife.  Further,  it  is 
important  to  note  that  of  the  five  types  of  union  permissible  by  clan  exo 
gamy,  but  not  recorded  as  having  actually  occurred,  four  would  be  perfectly 
consistent  with  exogamous  moieties.  The  simplest  explanation  of  the 
lacking  combinations  is  that  they  are  absent  simply  because  of  the  inade 
quate  extent  of  the  series.  It  can  hardly  be  assumed  that  the  Wide  Butte 
on  principle  eschewed  possible  mates  from  the  complementary  moiety, 
while  the  small  number  of  individuals  of  that  clan  (6)  sufficiently  accounts 
for  the  phenomenon.  A  similar  explanation  may  be  offered  for  the  lack  of 
Lower  Cap  and  maxo'xati  marriages,  there  being  only  seven  members  of  the 
latter  clan  in  my  list.  The  only  case  not  so  obviously  interpreted  in  this 
way  is  that  of  the  Real  Waters  (21)  and  the  Lower  Caps  (16),  but  even  here 
the  number  of  individuals  is  not  very  great,  and  the  moiety  factor  being 
excluded  no  explanation  but  chance  suggests  itself.  In  short,  I  believe  that 
in  principle  the  Hidatsa  had  no  objection  to  marrying  into  any  clan  except 
their  own. 

TERMS  OF  RELATIONSHIP. 

Morgan  rightly  insists  on  the  essential  similarity  between  the  Hidatsa 
and  Crow  kinship  systems  and  gives  a  fairly  accurate  exposition  of  their 
dominant  principles.1  He  deserves  special  credit  for  emphasizing  two  very 


Morgan,   (a),  188-189. 


1917.|  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  27 

characteristic  traits, —  the  placing  of  the  cross-cousins  into  generations 
different  from  the  speaker's,  and  the  classification  of  the  mother's  brother 
with  the  elder  brother.  The  Crow  and  Hidatsa  terminologies  differ  mark 
edly  from  the  ordinary  form  of  classificatory  system  as  found  among  the 
Dakota  in  the  complete  lack  of  specific  terms  for  uncle,  nephew  and  niece, 
and  cross-cousins.  Thus,  there  is  no  distinction  between  male  and  female 
speech  in  designating  the  brother's  son  and  daughter,  both  men  and  women 
classifying  these  with  their  own  children.  Morgan  errs,  however,  in  his 
treatment  of  the  paternal  aunt  relationship.  According  to  him,  this  aunt 
is  called  "grandmother"  and  correlatively  calls  her  brother's  children 
"grandchild";  though  he  also  mentions  a  distinct  word  phonetically  corre 
sponding  to  my  bacci'wi,  he  explains  that  it  is  restricted  to  male  usage. 
According  to  my  information,  this  is  incorrect.  The  word  baca'wi,  though 
without  a  correlative  to  designate  the  nephew-niece  relationship,  is  the 
regular  word  used  by  both  sexes  for  the  father's  sister;  and  this  relative  is 
not  addressed  as  grandmother.  This  statement  is  corroborated  by  Mat- 
thews's  data  (see  below) .  Morgan's  error  may  be  due  to  rationalization  from 
the  fact  that  this  aunt's  husband  is  undoubtedly  called  grandfather. 

Other  points  of  disagreement  with  Morgan  will  be  best  considered  in 
connection  with  the  terms  themselves. 

Matthews's  list l  does  not  give  nearly  as  many  connotations  as  Morgan's, 
but  is  rather  accurate  so  far  as  it  goes  and  phonetically  superior.  Matthews 
makes  the  mistake  of  claiming  for  the  Hidatsa  system  a  specific  term  for 
maternal  uncle,  ita'  du  (with  third  person  pronoun).  "Maternal  uncle" 
is  only  one  of  the  meanings  this  word  has;  it  is  applied,  as  Morgan  also 
notes,  to  the  elder  brother  (w.  sp.),  and  the  essential  thing  is  this  classifica 
tion  of  the  mother's  brother  with  the  elder  brother.  In  the  Bear-girl  myth, 
e.  g.,  the  heroine  addresses  her  elder  brothers  as  matd'ru.  Matthews  there 
fore  further  errs  in  stating  that  itame'  tsa  is  the  only  term  for  a  woman's 
elder  brother,  though  he  is  right  in  saying  that  this  is  a  general  name  for 
brother  or  male  cousin,  i.  e.,  is  used  by  both  sexes.  According  to  my  in 
formants  it  may  even  be  applied  to  sisters,  though  the  stem  seems  to  be 
simply  that  for  "man." 

While  clan  lines  are  obliterated  by  the  absence  of  specific  terms  for  the 
brother's  son  and  daughter  (w.  sp.),  the  clan  factor  becomes  so  dominant 
as  to  override  the  generation  factor  in  the  designation  of  cross-cousins,  the 
female  descendants  through  females  of  the  paternal  aunt,  of  the  maternal 
uncle,  and  of  the  maternal  grandmother's  brother.  At  least,  this  is  the 
most  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  empirical  facts. 


Matthews,  55-57. 


28  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

For  the  sake  of  clearness  I  shall,  regardless  of  the  necessity  of  some 
repetition  and  arbitrariness,  list  the  Hidatsa  terms  under  the  general 
headings  of  consanguinity  and  affinity,  and  further  subdivide  according  to 
generations.  Where  there  is  no  absolute  demarcation  between  terms  of 
consanguinity  and  affinity,  I  shall  indicate  overlapping  by  bracketing  the 
connotations  in  point.  It  should  be  noted  that  differences  in  generation  are 
not  distinguished  beyond  the  second  ascending  and  descending  generations. 

The  words  are  given  with  the  first  person  pronominal  forms,  but  where 
the  stem  differs  for  other  persons  these  forms  are  also  listed. 

Except  for  the  father  terms  and  where  a  vocative  form  is  precluded  by 
avoidance  rules,  the  vocative  and  non-vocative  stems  coincide,  but  minor 
alterations  are  made  either  by  suffixing  c  for  the  non-vocative  or  by  a  change 
of  accent.  Thus,  matawapica/,  my  grandchild  (voc.)  becomes  ma^tawapi'ca; 
maku',  my  grandmother  (voc.)  is  changed  to  maku'c,  and  matu' ',  my  brother's 
wife  (voc.,  w.  sp.)  becomes  matu'c. 


TERMS   OF   CONSANGUINITY. 

Speaker's  Generation.  In  order  to  avoid  unnecessary  reiteration,  I 
state  at  the  outset  that  parallel  cousins  are  brothers  and  sisters,  while  cross- 
cousins,  being  placed  in  the  parent  and  child  relationship,  are  not  included 
in  the  present  section.  Further,  it  should  be  noted  that  all  male  clansfolk 
are  brothers,  while  the  female  members  of  one's  clan  and  generation  are 
sisters. 

mi'aka'  (m.  sp.).  My  elder  brother,  mother's  brother,  mother's  mother's 
brother,  mother's  mother's  mother's  brother. 

matsu  ka'.  My  younger  brother  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  sister's  son,  (m.  sp.), 
sister's  daughter's  son  (m.  sp.). 

matawi'a  (m.  sp.).     My  elder  sister. 

mata  'kl  ica'  (m.  sp.).     My  younger  sister,  sister's  daughter. 

mata'ru  (w.  sp.).  My  elder  brother,  mother's  brother,  mother's 
mother's  brother. 

maru'u  (w.  sp.).     My  elder  sister. 

mata'ku'  (w.  sp.).     My  younger  sister. 

matawa'  tsa.  My  brother  or  sister,1  regardless  of  relative  age;  members 
of  one's  clan  are  designated  by  this  term. 

maku'tsati.  My  father's  clansman's  child  (see  p.  42).  (Father's 
clansmen's  children  may  be  addressed  as  brothers  and  sisters). 

»  As  noted  above,  the  stem  seems  to  be  that  for  "man." 


1917.1 


Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 


29 


o 


S-J 


§ 


T3 

o> 

S 

2 

O 


^  3 

.2  a 

03     O 


pa 


30  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

In  addition  to  the  above  may  be  listed  mata  wa  +  i'tia,  which  was 
given  as  an  alternative  for  mix  aka'.  The  word  is  readily  analyzed  into 
ma^ta,  first  person  possessive  pronoun;  wa,  one  who;  i'tia',  big,  old  (here 
with  comparative  meaning,  that  is,  my  big  (old)  one.  Brothers  and  sisters 
by  the  same  father  and  mother  might  be  called  collectively  makitawa'tsik&ti, 
makil'  rukfr  tats,  or  maki'  xuakd^  tats. 

matawl'a  is  obviously  derived  from  mi' a,  woman,  the  m  being  changed 
to  w  in  intervocalic  position. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  nomenclature  for  brothers  and  sisters  distinguish 
ing  relative  seniority  is  rather  full,  seven  out  of  eight  possible  concepts 
being  represented ;  only  for  the  younger  brother  is  there  a  term  common  to 
male  and  female  speech.  Mandan  is  poorer  by  two  terms,  that  for  younger 
brother  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.)  being  also  applied  to  the  elder  brother  by  women, 
while  the  men  do  not  differentiate  elder  and  younger  sisters.  Morgan  gives 
only  six  Hidatsa  terms,  merging  the  women's  with  the  men's  word  for 
younger  sister;  but  matd^ku'  is  certainly  correct  for  the  former  and  is 
listed  by  Matthews. 

Buffalo-bird-woman  (see  table,  p.  29)  calls  Wolf-chief  matsu^ka',  and  he  calls  her 
matawl'a;  she  called  her  deceased  elder  brother  Black-horn  matd'ru  and  was  called 
in  turn  mata'ki  icd. 

Buffalo-bird-woman  called  her  younger  sister,  Cold-medicine,  mata^ku,  and  was 
called  maru'. 

Cold-medicine's  children  would  have  been  Good-bird's  brothers  and  sisters. 

Wolf-chief  calls  White-owl  matsu^ka'  because  they  are  fellow-clansmen. 

Son-of-a-star's  brother's  children  are  Goodbird's  brothers  and  sisters. 

The  unusual  confusion  of  generations  indicated  by  the  meanings  listed 
above  was  checked  by  genealogical  data. 

Goodbird  calls  Wolf-chief  and  Tsiri'  'kec  mi*  oka  and  they  call  him  matstfkd; 
the  latter  is  addressed  mata'ru  by  Wl'atic  and  Buffalo-bird-woman.  Tsiri"kec 
is  also  elder  brother  to  Wolf-chief.  If  Buffalo-bird-woman  had  any  daughters  or 
daughter's  daughters,  all  of  these  would  address  Tsiri'  'kec  as  matd'ru,  elder  brother, 
and  he  would  call  them  mata  'klica',  younger  sister. 

Butterfly's  children  (table,  p.  31)  are  Buffalo-bird-woman's  brothers  and  sisters 
for  they  are  the  children  of  her  father's  sister's  son,  i.  e.,  of  her  "father"  (see  below). 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  31 


Genealogical  Table  2 


=  H 


Wi'atic  =  Small-ankle 


=  Butterfly 


Wolf-chief 

i 


Mrs.  Packs-wolf  =  Packs-wolf 


Buffalo-bird-woman  =  Son-of-star 


Crow  Mrs.  Goodbird  =  Goodbird 

(by  adoption) 


First  Ascending  Generation,  tate'  (voc.)-  -My  father,  father's  brother 
or  clansman,  hence  father's  mother's  brother,  and  father's  sister's  son, 
[mother's  sister's  husband]. 

ma'tuc  (non-voc.).     Coextensive  with  above;   3d  person,  aruwd'tu. 

tati'c  (non-voc.).     Also  coextensive  with  above. 

ita'  'kaxie\     My  father,  father's  clansman  (optional),  [father-in-law]. 

i'ka'.     My  mother,  mother's  sister,  [father's  brother's  wife]. 

ihu'c.     His  mother,  etc. 

baca'  wi.  Father's  sister  or  her  clanswoman  of  the  same  generation, 
father's  sister's  daughter,  father's  sister's  daughter's  daughter,  and  all  other 
female  descendants  through  females  ad  infinitum. 

The  poverty  of  Hidatsa  terminology  in- this  generation  is  noteworthy, 
not  only  as  regards  the  absence  of  uncles,  but  also  in  point  of  specific  terms 
for  the  sexes  and  as  regards  differentiation  of  vocative  and  non-vocative. 

Both  Buffalo-bird-woman  and  Wolf-chief  called  Small-ankle  late' '. 


Morgan  incorrectly  classes  the  father's  sister's  daughter  with  the  mother  and  her 
husband  with  the  father;  since  the  father's  sister's  daughter  is  classed  with  the 
paternal  aunt,  her  husband  is  logically  classed  with  this  aunt's  husband,  i.  e.,  as  a 
grandfather  (see  below).  His  error  in  classing  the  father's  sister's  daughter  with 
the  mother  is  presumably  a  consequence  of  his  mistake  concerning  the  father's  sister. 

Tsiri'  'kec  (see  table,  p.  29)  would  be  called  tale'  by  Goodbird's  children,  because 
he  is  Goodbird's  mother's  mother's  mother's  brother,  i.  e.,  his  "brother"  and  thus 
stands  to  them  in  the  relationship  of  a  father's  brother. 

Wolf-chief,  about  sixty-five  years  of  age,  actually  addressed  male  members  of 
his  father's  clan  as  "father"  even  if  they  were  little  boys. 


32 


Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 


Crow-arm  (see  table,  p.  29)  calls  Tsiri'  'kec  father,  because  the  latter  stands  to 
him  in  the  relationship  of  mother's  (adopted)  sister's  husband.  But  Tsiri'  'kec  is 
regarded  as  an  elder  brother  by  Goodbird,  Wolf-chief  and  Buffalo-bird-woman  for 
reasons  previously  given.  Hence  Crow-arm  is  treated  by  all  three  as  a  brother's 
son,  i.  e.,  is  called  "son"  and  addresses  the  two  men  as  "father."  This  is  not  mere 
rationalization  but  the  actual  mode  of  address.  My  interpreter  Goodbird  told  me 
he  had  never  known  before  my  inquiries  why  Crow-arm,  who  is  about  seventy-five 
years  of  age,  called  him  father. 

Butterfly  (table,  p.  31)  is  Buffalo-bird-woman's  father  because  he  is  her  father's 
sister's  son.  For  the  same  reason  Ben  Benson's  son  is  Goodbird's  father  (table, 
p.  32),  and  Goodbird  is  called  father  by  Wolf-chief's  son.  Benson's  daughter,  Leaf, 
and  Leaf's  daughter  are  called  bacd'wi  by  Goodbird. 

Butterfly's  daughter,  Mrs.  Packs-wolf,  is  Buffalo-bird-woman's  sister  and 
therefore  "mother"  to  Goodbird;  her  children  are  Buffalo-bird-woman's  children 
and  Goodbird's  brothers  and  sisters.  Butterfly's  son,  however,  would  be  Goodbird's 
brother,  for  he  would  be  Goodbird's  mother's  father's  sister's  son's  son  =  mother's 
father's  son  =  mother's  brother  =  brother. 

Wolf-chief's  son  calls  Buffalo-bird-woman  bacd'wi.  Wolf-chief's  daughter 
would  call  Buffalo-bird-woman's  daughter,  i.  e.,  her  father's  sister's  daughter  bacd'wi. 

Goodbird's  children,  male  and  female,  would  call  Tsiri'  'kec  tale' . 

Wolf-chief's  children  call  Goodbird  "father." 

Packs-wolf  and  all  of  Good-bird's  clan  sons  (i.  e.,  clansmen's  sons)  call  him 
it'd'kaxi^e,  literally,  "old  man";  tate'  would  be  equally  correct. 

Goodbird  called  Cold-medicine  i'ka'. 

When  a  clan-father  is  younger  than  the  speaker,  he  may  be  called  md'luo  kari'cta, 
i.  e.,  young  (or  small)  father. 

Son-of-a-star's  sister's  daughters  are  addressed  by  Goodbird  as  baca'wi  and  her 
sons  as  tate'. 


Genealogical  Table  3 


Ben  Benson  =  Brown- chest 


Son-of-star  =  Buffalo-bird-woman 


Benson's  son        Leaf  =  Hi 


Goodbird 


Leaf's  son 


Leaf's  daughter 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  33 

Second  Ascending  Generation.  mav  rut'a'ka'.  My  grandfather  (m.  sp., 
w.  sp.)>  grandfather's  brother  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  [father-in-law,  w.  sp.],  [father's 
sister's  husband,  m.  sp.,  w.  sp.],  [grandfather's  sister's  husband],  [husband's 
sister's  husband]. 

maku'.  My  grandmother  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  grandmother's  sister  (m.  sp., 
w.  sp.),  [mother-in-law,  w.  sp.],  [grandfather's  brother's  wife  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.)]. 

Morgan's  error  as  regards  the  use  of  the  grandmother  term  for  the 
father's  sister  has  already  been  noted.  He  is  also  mistaken  in  classing  the 
mother's  mother's  brother  with  the  grandfather;  as  explained  in  an  earlier 
section,  this  kinsman  is  called  elder  brother. 

The  classification  of  the  father's  sister's  husband  with  the  grandfather 
is  one  point  of  difference  from  the  Crow  system.  According  to  Morgan's 
schedules,  this  Hidatsa  feature  is  shared  only  by  unrelated  tribes,  viz.,  the 
Choctaw,  Chickasaw,  Creek,  and  Pawnee.1 

Ben  Benson  (table,  p.  32)  is  Goodbird's  father's  sister's  husband,  hence  is  called 
grandfather. 

Logical  inferences  from  peculiarities  of  nomenclature  previously  noted  result  in 
astonishing  anomalies.  Thus,  Hairy-coat  (see  table,  p.  32),  though  about  seventy, 
actually  addresses  Goodbird,  about  forty-five,  as  "grandfather."  The  reason  is 
that  his  real  grandfather,  Tsiri"kec,  being  Goodbird's  mother's  mother's  mother's 
brother  becomes  Goodbird's  elder  brother,  whence  the  conclusion  that  Goodbird 
is  a  grandfather's  brother  and  accordingly,  a  grandfather.  For  a  similar  reason 
Hairy-coat  addresses  Buffalo-bird-woman,  his  grandfather's  "sister,"  as  grand 
mother,  and  the  same  word  is  applied  to  her  by  his  brothers  and  children. 

Butterfly  is  Goodbird's  grandfather  because  for  reasons  given  in  the  preceding 
section  he  is  Goodbird's  mother's  "father." 

Small-ankle's  brothers  are  Goodbird's  grandfathers;  his  sisters  are  Goodbird's 
and  Goodbird's  children's  grandmothers.  Small-ankle's  sister's  husbands  are 
Goodbird's  grandfathers,  Small-ankle's  brother's  wife  is  Goodbird's  grandmother. 

Son-of-a-star's  paternal  aunt  is  Goodbird's  grandmother;  his  paternal  uncle  is 
Goodbird's  grandfather. 

First  Descending  Generation,  marica'.  My  son,  brother's  son  or  clan 
brother's  son,  mother's  brother's  son,  sister's  son  (this  last  meaning  only 
for  w.  sp.). 

batse'cie.  My  clan  son,  also  used  in  addressing  any  young  man  of 
unknown  relationship. 

ma  'ka'.  My  daughter,  brother's  daughter,  mother's  brother's  daughter, 
sister's  daughter  (this  last  meaning  only  for  w.  sp.). 

ma'tawakari'cta.     My  child  (literally,  my  little  one). 

One  anomaly  that  particularly  requires  genealogical  confirmation  here  is  the  lack 
of  a  nephew  and  niece  term  correlative  with  baca'wi.  The  correctness  of  the  mean- 

i  Morgan,  (a),  322. 


34  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

ings  given  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  Buffalo-bird-woman  calls  Wolf-chief's  son 
maricd  and  his  daughter  ma'kd  as  though  they  were  her  own  children,  while  in  turn 
she  is  addressed  baca'wi. 

Goodbird  calls  Wolf-chief's  children  maricd  and  ma  'ka'. 

Cold-medicine  called  Goodbird,  her  sister's  son,  marica'. 

Second  Descending  Generation,  ma'tawapica/.  My  grandchild,  my 
brother's  grandchild,  [wife's  brother's  son]. 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out  (p.  33)  that  the  mother's  mother's 
brother's  (or  even  the  mother's  mother's  mother's  brother's)  daughter's 
son  is  classed  with  the  grandchild. 

Consistently  with  his  remarks  on  the  designation  of  the  father's  sister,  Morgan 
classifies  the  woman's  brother's  child  with  the  grandchild.  As  shown  in  the  preced 
ing  section,  a  woman  classifies  her  brother's  children  with  her  own.  Morgan  further 
errs  in  stating  that  a  man  classifies  his  sister's  grandchild  with  his  own;  this  is  im 
possible  since  his  sister's  children  are  called  his  brothers  and  sisters. 

Buffalo-bird-woman  calls  any  one  of  Goodbird's  children,  male  or  female,  mata- 
wapica'. 

TERMS  OF  AFFINITY. 

Speaker's  Generation,  ma'  kira'c  (non-voc.).  My  husband,  provided 
I  have  never  been  married  before. 

ma'tamwi'a  (non-voc.).  My  wife,  provided  she  has  never  been  married 
before.  (The  last  two  syllables  form  the  usual  word  for  "woman"). 

ma'taruwatsec.  My  husband,  if  I  have  been  married  before.  (The 
last  two  syllables  form  the  usual  word  for  "  man.") 

e'  raha  (non-voc.).     My  spouse. 

u'a.     His  wife. 

There  is  considerable  complexity  in  the  nomenclature  of  spouses  and 
their  brothers  or  sisters,  and  the  definitions  given  must  be  supplemented  by 
the  following  data.  A  man  may  call  his  wife  by  name,  but  a  woman  must 
not  call  her  husband  by  name  though  the  words  forming  it  are  not  taboo  to 
her.  Spouses  call  each  other  hi're  or  hari'  'ku,  which  words  are  not  so  much 
terms  of  kinship  as  demonstrative  interjections  meaning  "that  fellow"  or 
"  that  woman."  If  the  wife  has  not  been  married  before,  her  husband  may 
call  her  hi're  maVaruwi'a.  If  the  woman  had  been  previously  married,  the 
husband's  joking-relatives  would  object  to  his  using  the  latter  expression 
with  respect  to  her. 

Teknonymy  may  be  used  non-vocatively  by  both  spouses  if  the  wife  has 
been  married  before.  The  woman  is  then  spoken  of  as-  mara'ka  ihu'c,  my 
child's  mother,  and  the  man  either  by  a  corresponding  phrase  or  with  the 
name  of  the  child  substituted. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Croiv  Social  Organization.  35 

I  have  no  instance  of  u'u  compounded  with  the  first  person  pronoun 
though  this  combination  occurs  with  the  same  root  in  the  word  for  brother's 
wife  (see  below).  Instead  of  u'a  may  be  used  the  third  person  form  of 
ma'iaruwi'a  (with  the  restriction  of  meaning  already  noted). 

Of  several  women  in  a  polygamous  household,  each  not  previously 
married  might  refer  to  her  husband  as  md^  kird'c. 

A  man  calls  his  wife's  sister  as  he  does  his  own  wife,  viz.,  hi' re  or  ha'ri- 
wa'ku  (apparently  a  variation  of  hari'  *ku),  or  by  name.  Non-vocatively 
he  uses  a  descriptive  phrase,  e.  g.,  ma^taruwi'ac  itd'  kuc,  my  wife's  younger 
sister.  When  a  man  has  taken  to  wife  first  the  elder  and  then  the 
younger  of  two  sisters,  the  latter  is  referred  to  as  i^taruwi'a  kari'ctac,  "  his 
young  wife."  Goodbird  calls  his  wife's  elder  sister  by  name,  other  people 
refer  to  her  as  u'a  i'ti  'ac,  "his  wife's  elder  one";  he  calls  his  wife's  younger 
sister  by  name,  while  other  people  refer  to  her  as  itaruwi'ac,  "his  wife." 

A  woman  thinks  of  her  sister's  husband  as  her  own,  but  calls  him  batse', 
"man";  non-vocatively  she  uses  a  descriptive  phrase,  e.  g.,  marii'c  kird^c, 
"my  elder  sister's  husband." 

This  last  expression  is  given  by  Morgan  for  the  father's  brother's  daughter's 
husband  (w.  sp.);  this  is  of  course  correct  provided  the  speaker  is  younger  than  her 
female  cousin.  Morgan's  ma-ensh-ke-rash  for  the  sister's  husband  (w.  sp.)  is  probably 
merely  a  typographical  error. 

A  woman  calls  her  husband's  brother  hi'  re;  the  corresponding  non- 
vocative  form  is  given  below. 

iri'kue  ts  is  used  for  a  fellow-wife,  presumably  only  if  not  a  sister. 
In  jest  a  man  may  call  his  wife's  brother  his  wife. 

Small-ankle  had  four  wives  and  called  each  of  them  by  name,  referring  to  them  as 
mataruwi'ac.  Each  wife  referred  to  him  as  mofkira'c. 

The  remaining  terms  of  affinity  in  this  generation  are  as  follows :  — 

buv  aka'  (m.  sp.)     My  brother's  wife. 

mara'ti'  (m.  sp.).     My  wife's  brother,  sister's  husband. 

maci'  kicdc  (non-voc.).     My  husband's  brother. 

matu'  (w.  sp.).     My  brother's  wife,  my  husband's  sister. 

Morgan  rightly  extends  the  meaning  of  bu'aka  to  cover  the  wives  of  relatives 
classed  with  the  brother,  viz.,  the  father's  brother's  son,  mother's  sister's  son,  and 
mother's  brother;  he  is  mistaken  in  also  translating  the  word  "husband's  brother," 
for  which  a  specific  term  is  given  in  my  list,  bu'aka,  both  in  Hidatsa  and  Crow,  is 
clearly  derived  from  u'a,  wife,  (bu'a,  my  wife),  mara  'ti'  is  correctly  given  by  Morgan 
as  applying  to  the  husband  of  the  father's  brother's  and  mother's  sister's  daughter. 
Of  matu'  he  also  extends  the  connotation  correctly  to  the  wives  of  the  parallel  cousins. 

Buffalo-bird-woman  calls  Wolf-chief's  wife  matu'  and  is  so  called  by  her  sister-in- 
law. 


36  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXIr 

First  Ascending  Generation.  maN  rut'a'ka'.  My  father-in-law  (w.  sp.); 
husband's  sister's  husband  (w.  sp.) ;  father's  sister's  husband,  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.) ; 
[grandfather,  m.  sp.,  w.  sp.]. 

niaku'.  My  mother-in-law  (w.  sp.);  my  sister's  mother-in-law  (w.  sp.); 
fmy  grandmother,  m.  sp.,  w.  sp.]. 

Since  the  parent-in-law  taboo  is  observed  by  the  Hidatsa,  neither  the 
wife's  father  nor  her  mother  was  normally  addressed.  The  regulation  as 
to  the  former  was,  however,  less  strict  and  when  it  was  relaxed  the  son-in- 
law  might  use  the  vocative  form  iVa'kaxie,  "old  man."  Non-vocatively 
he  uses  another  form  of  the  same  stem,  ma'ta  it'd'  'ka.  The  mother-in-law 
is  non-vocatively  referred  to  as  mat'ut'a'ka;  this  term  also  includes  all 
those  the  wTife  calls  mother,  grandmother,  and  baca'wi. 

I  find  no  warrant  whatsoever  for  Morgan's  term  md-na-tish,  which  he 
translates  "husband's  father,  wife's  father."  Phonetically  his  word  re 
sembles  that  for  brother-in-law  (m.  sp.). 

I  have  collected  various  instances  of  the  use  of  mcf  rut'a'ka' '.  Thus,  Wolf- 
chief's  son's  wife  would  so  call  Goodbird,  her  husband's  father's  sister's  son  =  hus 
band's  "father."  If  Small-ankle  were  still  living,  Wolf-chief's  wife  would  address 
him  as  ma'rut'a'ka'  and  he  would  call  her  mat'u  ka' . 

Morgan  defines  his  equivalent  of  my  mat'ut'a'ka  to  mean  both  wife's  mother  and 
husband's  mother.  According  to  my  data,  only  the  former  is  correct.  If  Small- 
ankle's  wife  were  living,  Mrs.  Wolf-chief  would  call  her  maku. 

Wolf-chief's  daughter's  husband  would  refer  to  Goodbird,  i.  e.,  his  wife's  father's 
sister's  son,  as  ita'  'kaxie'. 

Wolf-chief's  son's  wife  would  call  Goodbird,  i.  e.,  her  husband's  father's  sister's 
son,  wav  ruta  'ka',  the  same  word  which  would  be  used  by  Wolf-chief's  daughter's 
child. 

Goodbird  is  called  ma'  ruta'ka'  by  his  wife's  brother's  wife. 

Goodbird's  wife  and  all  her  sisters  call  Buffalo-bird-woman,  maku. 

If  Small-ankle's  wife  were  living,  Wolf-chief's  wife  would  call  her  maku. 

Goodbird  classes  with  his  father-in-law  his  wife's  father's  brothers,  both  her 
grandfathers  and  all  their  brothers,  her  father's  sister's  sons  and  her  other  father's 
clansmen,  Mrs.  Goodbird's  grandmother  and  their  sisters,  her  mother's  sisters, 
her  father's  own  and  clan  sisters  are  all  Goodbird's  mothers-in-law. 

First  Descending  Generation,  mat  'uv  ka'.  My  daughter-in-law,  wife's 
brother's  wife,  mother's  brother's  son's  wife. 

The  son-in-law  is  not  addressed  directly  on  account  of  the  avoidance 
rule.  Non-vocatively  he  may  be  referred  to  in  several  ways,  of  which 
no'  ha'  kac  is  probably  the  most  common;  qualified  by  the  word  for  woman, 
no'  ha'  kac  wi'a,  it  is  sometimes  applied  to  the  daughter-in-law  instead  of 
the  word  given  above.  Another  word  for  the  daughter's  husband  is  matu'ti. 
mard'ka',  "  my  child"  and  ma  'ka'  kird'c,  "my  daughter's  husband,"  are  like 
wise  used  in  referring  to  him. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  37 

According  to  Morgan,  men  class  the  sister's  son's  wife  with  the  daughter,  address 
ing  her  ma'ka'.  Though  I  have  no  note  on  this  relationship,  this  seems  inconsistent 
with  other  connotations.  Since  the  sister's  son  is  classed  with  the  younger  brother, 
his  wife  would  properly  be  a  brother's  wife,  i.  e.,  addressed  as  bit  oka'. 

As  Morgan  notes,  the  term  mat  u"  ka'  is  applied  to  the  wife  of  the  brother's  son 
(m.  sp.)  and  of  the  sister's  son  (w.  sp.).  For  son-in-law  Morgan  only  gives  the 
phonetic  equivalent  of  my  matu'ti.  He  is  right  in  including  under  this  head  the 
mother's  brother's  daughter's  husband. 

Morgan  gives  me-na  for  sister's  daughter's  husband  (m.  sp.).  I  did  not  obtain 
this  word  and  think  it  must  be  an  error;  the  sister's  daughter  being  a  "sister,"  her 
husband  would  be  a  "brother-in-law." 

Another  term  found  in  Morgan's  schedules  is  mat-to' -we-a-ka-zhe,  "brother's 
son's  wife"  (w.  sp.).  Since  the  brother's  son  is  classed  with  the  son,  his  wife  would 
naturally  be  called  by  the  usual  word  for  daughter-in-law. 

If  Wolf-chief's  daughter  married,  her  husband  would  be  referred  to  by  Good- 
bird  as  no^haka',  matu'ti  or  markka'.  If  Wolf-chief's  son  married,  his  wife  would  be 
called  mat  'u'ka'  by  Goodbird. 

If  Small-ankle's  wife  were  living,  she  would  call  Mrs.  Wolf-chief  mat  'wv  ka'. 

Son-of-star  was  Small-ankle's  real  son-in-law.  Small-ankle  would  also  have 
classed  with  Son-of-star  the  husbands  of  Buffalo-bird-woman's  daughters,  and  of  her 
daughters'  daughters,  whom  of  course  Buffalo-bird-woman  would  also  regard  as 
sons-in-law.  Good-bird's  wife  is  Small-ankle's  daughter-in-law;  Wolf-chief's 
daughter's  husband  is  Buffalo-bird-woman's  son-in-law;  Goodbird's  daughter's 
husband  would  stand  in  this  relationship  to  both  Goodbird  and  Buffalo-bird-woman. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  features  of  the  Hidatsa  kinship  system  is  the 
fact  that  the  same  individuals  may  stand  to  each  other  in  two  or  more 
relationships.  The  concrete  cases  are  too  few  to  permit  generalization  as 
to  the  preferential  use  of  one  of  the  possible  terms  in  actual  practice,  and  I 
must  accordingly  content  myself  with  describing  the  facts. 

For  reasons  previously  set  forth  Hairy-coat  is  Buffalo-bird-woman's 
"grandchild."  But  he  is  also  a  member  of  the  same  clan  as  Buffalo-bird- 
woman's  father,  hence  he  is  her  "father."  According  to  my  informants, 
both  appellations  might  have  been  used,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  Buffalo-bird- 
woman  and  her  brother  Wolf-chief  only  called  Hairy-coat  "father"  when 
they  received  a  sacred  bundle  object  from  him. 

Still  more  instructive  are  the  relations  between  Packs-wolf  and  Goodbird. 
From  diagram  2,  it  appears  that  Packs-wolf  is  Goodbird's  mother's  father's 
sister's  son's  daughter's  husband  =  mother's  father's  daughter's  husband  = 
mother's  sister's  husband  =  father.  On  the  other  hand,  Packs-wolf's 
father  was  a  member  of  Goodbird's  clan,  whence  the  relationship  would  be 
reversed,  Goodbird  becoming  Packs-wolf's  father.  But  this  is  not  all. 
Mrs.  Goodbird's  sister  adopted  Packs-wolf's  brother,  Crow-not-knowing, 
as  her  brother,  whence  Mrs.  Goodbird  likewise  became  sister  to  Crow-not- 
knowing,  all  his  brothers  simultaneously  becoming  her  brothers  as  well. 


38  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

Thus,  Packs-wolf  is  a  brother  of  Goodbird's  wife  and  accordingly  Good- 
bird's  brother-in-law.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Goodbird  never  called  Packs- 
wolf  tail'  but  batsc'  ec  or  batse'  tcia'  because  of  the  clan  relationship,  which 
thus  took  precedence  here  but  for  some  reasons  not  in  the  case  of  Hairy- 
coat.  Packs-wolf  called  Goodbird  tate',  but  they  might  treat  each  other  as 
brothers-in-law  and  Mrs.  Packs-wolf  in  speaking  to  Goodbird  about  her 
husband  would  say,  "  na'  atu  di'  rati  e'raha,  "  your  father  your  brother-in- 
law  my  spouse." 

Son-of-star  was  Goodbird's  own  father.  On  the  other  hand,  Goodbird 
was  Son-of-star's  father  because  Goodbird  is  of  the  Prairie-chicken  clan  to 
which  Son-of-star's  own  father  belonged.  Goodbird  never  actually  called 
his  father  "son";  he  was,  however,  entitled  to  his  share  when  Son-of-star 
gave  presents  to  his  clan  fathers  (see  p.  40). 

Poor-wolf  belonged  to  the  same  clan  as  Buffalo-bird-woman's  father, 
and  she  belongs  to  Poor-wolf's  father's  clan.  Accordingly,  he  was  both  her 
clan  father  and  also  her  clan  son.  Actually,  she  only  called  him  "father." 
This  may  have  been  due  either  to  his  age  or  to  his  functioning  as  a  cere 
monial  father  towards  her. 

With  reference  to  Small-ankle's  wife  (Buffalo-bird-woman's  mother), 
Poor-wolf  also  stood  in  a  dual  relationship.  Since  she  was  wife  to  a  clan 
brother  he  might  have  viewed  her  as  a  sister-in-law;  actually  he  never 
called  her  buaka'  but  addressed  her  as  baca'wi  since  she  was  one  of  his 
father's  clanswomen. 

Buffalo-bird-woman  looked  upon  Cherry-necklace  as  her  brother-in-law 
because  her  brother,  Painted-yellow,  was  his  brother-in-law.  But  when 
another  brother,  Bear's-necklace,  married  Cherry-necklace's  daughter, 
Buffalo-bird-woman  henceforth  regarded  him  as  her  father-in-law.  In 
such  cases,  my  informant  explained,  the  relationship  of  father-in-law  takes 
precedence  and  thereafter  she  would  not  joke  with  Cherry-necklace  any 
more. 

KINSHIP  USAGES. 

Brother  and  Sister.  As  among  the  Crow,  it  was  not  considered  proper 
that  an  adult  brother  and  sister  should  hold  long  conversations  together. 
"If  I  am  married,"  said  Buffalo-bird-woman,  "and  Wolf-chief  visits  me 
with  his  wife,  he  talks  with  my  husband  and  I  talk  with  his  wife.  If  he 
should  come  to  my  house  when  I  am  alone,  we  should  settle  any  business  or 
say  anything  special  we  may  have  to  say  to  each  other  and  then  he  would 
leave." 

This  in  no  way  interferes  with  their  sentiments.     "I  love  Wolf-chief," 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  39 

said  the  same  informant,  "and  he  loves  me.  I  have  nothing  against  him 
in  my  heart."  She  always  tries  to  help  him  and  vice  versa.  When  she  was 
little,  she  took  care  of  him.  If  he  did  anything  wrong,  she  scolded  him, 
and  if  she  did  anything  out  of  the  way  she  was  scolded  by  him.  Until  she 
was  ten  years  of  age,  they  slept  together,  but  later  they  slept  separately 
and  from  that  time  on  only  spoke  to  each  other  when  necessary. 

Black-horn  gave  Buffalo-bird-woman  many  horses,  while  she  gave 
presents  to  his  wife. 

A  woman  would  tan  her  brother's  robes  and  prepare  meals  for  him.  He 
would  exhort  his  sister  not  to  do  anything  bad.  Neither  will  say  anything 
suggestive  of  obscenity  in  the  other's  presence. 

When  there  is  a  dance  at  which  presents  are  distributed,  a  sister  will  ask 
her  brother  to  give  away  her  own  horses.  On  one  occasion  Buffalo-bird- 
woman's  brothers  thus  disposed  of  seven  of  her  horses. 

Brothers;  Mother's  Brothers.  An  elder  brother  is  the  proper  person  to 
punish  his,  junior,  and  when  the  latter  is  old  enough  his  senior  exhorts  him 
to  seek  visions,  to  go  to  war  and  earn  honor  marks,  etc. 

The  relations  between  a  mother's  brother  and  a  sister's  son  (m.  sp.)  are 
said  to  be  consistent  with  the  terminological  peculiarities  noted  in  a  previous 
section.  Wolf-chief  treats  Goodbird  as  a  younger  brother  and  says  his 
feelings  towards  him  are  the  same  as  they  were  towards  Changing-enemy, 
his  deceased  younger  brother. 

Sisters.  Sisters  work  together  and  help  each  other.  Normally,  when  a 
younger  sister  grew  up  to  maturity,  she  was  also  married  by  her  elder 
sister's  husband  (see  p.  46). 

Cousins.  Buffalo-bird-woman  laughed  outright  at  the  query  whether 
Goodbird  might  marry  Wolf-chief's  daughter,  i.  e.,  his  maternal  uncle's 
daughter,  whom  he  calls  "daughter."  The  idea  of  a  man  marrying  his 
daughter !  It  would  be  the  same  as  though  he  were  marrying  his  own  child. 
She  had  never  heard  of  such  a  case.  People  would  regard  such  a  married 
couple  as  dogs. 

After  the  above,  it  hardly  requires  special  statement  that  marriage 
between  parallel  cousins  was  also  tabooed. 

Parents  and  Children.  One  of  the  points  in  which  the  Hidatsa  differ 
sharply  from  the  Crow  is  in  the  more  systematic  character  of  their  thinking 
and  acting.  Thus,  I  get  the  impression  that  in  the  education  of  children 
the  Crow  allowed  their  boys  and  girls  to  pick  up  many  things  by  mere 
observation  which  the  Hidatsa  taught  by  definite  instruction.  This  is 
strikingly  true  in  the  sphere  of  religion,  where  a  father  would  point  out  to 
his  son  each  progressive  step  in  the  way  of  sacrifice  and  prayer  which  it  was 
proper  for  him  to  take. 


40  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

This  leads  to  a  sociologically  important  point.  Among  the  Hidatsa 
ceremonialism  is  highly  developed,  particularly  in  connection  with  certain 
sacred  bundles  ("shrines,"  as  Doctor  Gilbert  L.  Wilson  calls  them).  Now, 
while  descent  in  the  clan  is  strictly  matrilineal,  as  already  shown,  property 
rights  to  the  sacred  bundles  are  transmitted  exclusively  in  the  paternal  line, 
the  method  being  for  children  to  buy  each  ceremonial  privilege  jointly  from 
their  own  father.  It  is  worth  emphasizing  that  a  man  does  not  sell  these 
ceremonial  prerogatives  to  his  brother's  sons  but  only  to  his  own,  though 
both  types  of  relatives  are  classed  together  in  the  native  kinship  nomen 
clature.  In  the  matter  of  ceremonial  transmission  the  Hidatsa  thus  differ 
strikingly  from  the  Hopi,  another  matrilineal  tribe,  among  whom  cere 
monial  offices  usually  descend  from  maternal  uncle  to  sister's  son  or  from 
elder  to  younger  brother. 

Children  are  not  beaten  by  their  parents.  So  far  as  corporal  punish 
ment  was  used  at  all,  it  was  administered  by  an  elder  brother  and  not  so 
much  by  blows  as  by  immersion  in  the  Missouri.  I  have  one  note,  how 
ever,  to  the  effect  that  a  mother  might  punish  her  own  but  not  her  sister's 
children  unless  she  had  adopted  them ;  probably  my  informant  had  in  mind 
some  mild  form  of  correction. 

Until  the  age  of  about  ten  little  girls  might  sleep  in  the  same  bed  with 
their  fathers;  after  that  they  would  not  do  so  any  more. 

Father's  Clan.  In  general,  it  may  be  said  that  the  father's  clansfolk  are 
preeminently  the  people  entitled  to  receive  gifts  whenever  a  proper  occasion 
arises.  Possibly  connected  with  this  notion  is  the  Hidatsa  custom  of 
securing  ceremonial  articles  and  privileges  from  a  clan  father,  who  would 
then  be  fed  for  his  services.  This  feature  is  very  prominent  in  the  purchase 
of  membership  in  the  age-societies:  men  select  clan-fathers  for  their  cere 
monial  "fathers,"  women  clan  aunts  for  their  ceremonial  "mothers." 
Funerals  were  always  conducted  by  members  of  the  clan  of  the  dead  per 
son's  father.  A  clan  father  was  always  honored  by  his  clan  sons  and  in 
return  he  would  never  reprove  them  but  treated  them  with  kindness. 

During  a  dance  Wolf-chief  would  give  presents  of  calico  and  blankets  or 
even  of  horses  to  his  clan  aunts.  He  excelled  all  his  clansmen  in  the  gen 
erosity  he  displayed  towards  their  fathers'  clansfolk.  Before  going  to  war, 
he  once  asked  a  clan-father  to  paint  his  face  and  put  a  medicine  feather  on 
his  head.  In  the  ensuing  fight  my  informant  shot  and  struck  an  enemy, 
so  he  saw  that  his  clan-father  had  the  power  to  help  him.  Whenever  he 
had  good  luck  in  the  chase,  he  would  call  in  his  clan-fathers  to  give  them  a 
feast;  and  he  still  invites  them  when  he  has  anything  good  to  eat.  On  the 


Lowie,   (d),  225-228. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  41 

other  hand,  the  clan  fathers  sometimes  called  Wolf-chief  to  give  him  the 
best  of  their  food.  They  would  also  pray  to  their  medicine  bundles  on  his 
behalf,  saying,  "This  is  my  son,  try  to  help  him." 

Buffalo-bird-woman  said  she  tried  to  give  suitable  presents  to  her 
brother's  son  and  he  would  give  her  presents  whenever  he  thought  of  it  but 
not  from  any  feeling  that  a  return  gift  must  be  made. 

Father's  clansmen  were  also  prominently  associated  with  an  individual's 
names.  When  a  young  man  had  performed  a  creditable  war  exploit  he 
would  assume  some  clan  father's  name,  paying  its  owner  for  it.  The  clan 
father  would  publicly  announce  the  fact  and  for  a  while  use  his  boyhood 
name  until  he  acquired  a  new  one.  Women  did  not  buy  new  names  in  this 
manner,  but  with  men  it  seems  to  have  been  a  very  common  practice  under 
any  circumstances.  Thus  Small-ankle  sold  one  of  his  names,  Spotted-wolf, 
to  a  clan  son.  A  man  was  at  liberty  to  dispose  not  only  of  his  own  name  in 
this  way,  but  also  of  that  of  any  one  of  his  clansmen.  For  example,  Butter 
fly  gave  one  of  Small-ankle's  names  Axpara'axic,  to  their  clan  son,  Hunts- 
the-enemy;  it  would  not  matter  in  such  a  case  whether  Small-ankle  were 
living  or  dead.  When  Wolf-chief  had  struck  a  coup,  his  clan-fathers  would 
call  him  by  the  name  of  some  famous  deceased  warrior  belonging  to  their 
clan;  in  return  my  informant  gave  them  horses  and  property.  Wolf- 
chief's  clan-fathers  were  very  kind  to  him,  giving  him  many  names,  for 
which  he  was  envied  by  his  fellow-clansmen.  Sometimes  these  offered  to 
buy  some  of  them,  but  he  refused. 

On  one  occasion  Wolf-chief  received  a  name  by  way  of  indemnification. 
When  in  St.  Paul  he  asked  for  medicine  (whiskey?)  in  a  drug  store  and  re 
ceived  a  big  bottle,  which  he  put  into  his  bag.  On  his  return,  a  father's 
clansman  stole  it  and  put  back  the  empty  bottle.  Wolf-chief  said  to  his 
clan-fathers,  "Well,  fathers,  some  white  man  must  have  stolen  this  bottle." 
They  replied,  "Well,  son,  we'll  give  you  a  good  name  and  you  will  not  have 
to  pay  for  it."  Since  then  he  has  received  many  names  from  them. 

A  highly  characteristic  practice  shared  with  the  Crow  is  that  of  bestow 
ing  a  nickname  derived  from  an  action  or  peculiarity  not  connected  with  the 
person  named  but  with  a  member  of  his  father's  clan.1  If  a  man  made  some 
such  statement  as  "My  face  is  Mandan,"  one  of  his  clansmen  might  come 
to  one  of  their  clan  sons  and  call  him  "Mandan-face."  Or  if  a  man  said 
to  a  fellow-clansman,  "  I  have  plenty  of  spotted  horses,"  the  latter  might 
call  in  one  of  their  clan  sons  and  say,  "  Your  name  shall  be  Many-spotted- 
horses."  To  take  an  actual  case.  A  few  days  before  an  interview  with 
Wolf-chief,  a  boy  about  ten  years  old  entered  his  store  and  said,  "  Well,  son, 


1  Lowie,   (c),  202,  216. 


42  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

I  have  a  good  name  for  you, —  Packs-iron."  He  was  a  member  of  the  Real 
Water  clan  to  which  Wolf-chief's  father  had  belonged  and  another  Real 
Water  was  carrying  about  a  lump  of  iron  with  which  to  massage  his  back, 
whence  the  name.  The  boy  said,  "  I  want  some  candy  because  I  gave  you 
a  good  name,"  and  Wolf -chief  gladly  gave  him  some.  On  another  occasion 
a  clan-father  came  to  Wolf-chief  and  said,  "  Son,  I  want  to  get  some  dinner, 
give  me  a  large  can  of  strawberries,  a  pear,  and  some  crackers.  I  want  to 
give  you  a  very  good  name  this  time."  Wolf-chief  brought  in  what  his 
"father"  had  asked  for,  the  latter  ate  some  of  the  food  and  took  along  the 
rest,  and  before  leaving  he  spoke  as  follows :  "  My  hip  is  sore  and  I  am  pretty 
lame.  I'll  give  you  the  name  of  Sore-hip,  if  I  do  not  give  you  the  name, 
some  one  else  will."  Wolf -chief  has  received  many  names  on  account  of 
Butterfly's  actions,  hence  he  always  treats  Butterfly  with  consideration. 

Grandparents.  Grandparents  on  both  sides  love  their  grandchildren  but, 
oddly  enough  for  a  tribe  with  matrilineal  organization,  one  informant 
declared  that  the  children  belonged  more  particularly  to  the  father's  parents, 
wrho  took  care  of  them  and  took  them  to  bed  with  them.  However,  accord 
ing  to  another  statement  orphans  are  cared  for  by  the  maternal  grand 
mother. 

According  to  Buffalo-bird-woman,  grandmothers  and  grandchildren 
through  adoption  were  on  a  footing  of  mutual  raillery.  Thus,  her  son's 
wife  adopted  as  her. son  Rufus,  the  child  of  her  mother's  half-sister's  daugh 
ter.  Buffalo-bird-woman  will  tell  Rufus  to  make  haste  and  marry  "  because 
if  you  don't  get  a  wife  soon,  your  girl  will  soon  get  old."  On  the  other  hand 
when  she  asked  for  a  looking-glass,  Rufus  said,  "  Don't  let  her  have  it,  she 
wants  to  send  the  reflection  to  an  old  man  she  loves." 


JOKING-RELATIVES. 

As  among  the  Crow,1  individuals  whose  fathers  belonged  to  the  same 
clan  were  "  joking-relatives"  (maku'tsatsi).  The  basic  notion  of  this 
relationship  in  its  more  serious  aspects  seems  to  be  that  of  licensed  and 
unrestricted  criticism  for  an  infraction  of  tribal  custom.  When  a  man  had 
committed  some  reprehensible  or  improper  deed,  e.  g.,  married  a  clan  mate/ 
or  shown  jealousy,  it  was  not  the  function  of  his  fellow-clansmen  but  of  his 
maku'tsati  to  reprove  him  or  make  fun  of  him.  They  would  spread  the 
news  of  the  wrongdoing  and  throw  it  in  the  offender's  teeth  and  he  was 
obliged  to  take  all  this  in  good  part  as  the  prerogative  of  maku'tsati. 


'  Lowio.   (r),  204  et  seq. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 

These  practices  began  even  in  childhood.  A  girl  would  reproach 
another  for  not  knowing  how  to  build  an  earth-lodge,  while  one  boy  would 
say  to  another,  "  I  have  some  honor  marks,  you  have  nothing."  Sometimes 
maku'tsati  played  against  each  other  in  games. 

Joking-relatives  addressed  one  another  as  brothers  and  sisters.  Accord 
ing  to  Buffalo-bird-woman,  they  gave  one  another  presents;  for  example, 
Sitting-owl,  whom  she  called  younger  brother,  gave  her  horses.  If  a  man 
is  wounded  in  battle,  his  maku'tsati  is  expected  to  dismount  and  save  him, 
otherwise  he  will  get  the  reputation  of  a  coward. 

If  a  woman  had  been  honorably  bought  in  marriage  while  her  maku'tsati 
had  merely  eloped  with  her  sweetheart,  the  former  would  twit  the  latter 
with  this  difference,  saying,  "  You  are  a  bad  woman,  no  one  knows  where  . 
you  sleep  with  this  man,  no  one  knows  who  your  first  husband  was,"  or, 
"You  are  bad,  I  am  a  good  woman  for  I  have  been  bought."  If  a  woman 
is  expert  at  porcupine  quillwork  and  her  maku'tsati  is  not,  the  former 
will  scoff  at  the  other  for  her  ignorance,  saying,  di  watski'wits,  "  I  sew  you 
up,"  which  is  the  word  applied  t'o  the  sewing  up  at  the  end  of  a  piece  of 
quill-work.  Similarly,  if  one  woman  has  done  a  great  deal  of  tanning, 
she  will  make  fun  of  another  of  inferior  skill  by  saying,  "I  scrape  your 
back." 

Among  male  fellow-jokers  certain  peculiar  usages  were  in  vogue.  A 
man  wrho  has  scalped  a  slain  enemy  has  the  right  of  cutting  a  maku'tsati's 
hair,  provided  the  latter  has  no  like  feat  to  his  credit  or  has  performed  it 
less  frequently.  In  such  a  case  the  hair-cutter  pays  a  horse  to  his  joking- 
relative.  Sometimes  the  one  whose  hair  is  threatened  will  say,  "  Give  me 
your  wife,"  then  the  joker  desists,  for  otherwise  he  would  have  to  surrender 
his  wife.  One  who  has  struck  an  enemy  may  whip  his  maku'tsati,  always 
granting  that  the  latter  has  not  done  likewise.  Hairy-coat  said  that  since 
he  had  performed  this  greatest  of  war  deeds  he  was  exempt  from  having  his 
hair  cut  and  might  knock  down  with  his  pipe  any  one  attempting  to  cut  it. 

\\  olf-chief  said  that  one  who  has  struck  an  enemy,  if  angry  at  his  joking- 
relative,  may  strike  him,  prefacing  the  act  with  the  statement,  "  Over  there 
I  struck  an  enemy."  One  who  had  taken  a  scalp  and  cut  off  his  maku'tsati's 
hair  would  say, 

"batse'  hiri1  ka'  tsiwa  a'ra  \varu'  'tsic. " 
"A  man     of  this  size     his  hair     I  got." 

Then  he  summoned  his  father's  clansfolk,  saying,  "My  fathers  (or  aunts), 
come  and  bury  this  enemy  I  have  killed,  and  receive  one  of  my  horses." 
Some  clan  father  or  aunt  would  then  come  and  give  a  blanket  to  the 
man  whose  hair  had  been  cut.  Before  the  hair-cutting,  the  man  who  is 


Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

to  suffer  the  indignity  designates  a  horse  belonging  to  his  fellow-joker 
and  says,  "That's  the  one  you  will  pay  me,  and  you  will  give  up  your 
wife  too." 

The  other  replies,  "I'll  give  you  a  horse."  The  one  whose  hair  was  to 
have  been  cut  then  takes  a  stick,  strikes  his  maku'tsati  and  says,  "  I  am  using 
your  honor  mark  because  you  love  your  horse  and  your  wife."  Then  he 
pays  a  horse  to  the  man  struck.  All  the  other  maku'tsati  deride  the  one 
who  was  afraid  to  lose  his  wife  and  his  horse.  They  say,  "  Everyone  uri 
nates  on  him,  he  is  no  good,  he  loves  his  wife.  If  anyone  took  her  away,  I 
am  sure  he  would  try  to  recover  her."  This  alludes  to  the  very  fundamental 
notion  that  a  man  of  standing  must  not  be  jealous.  If  his  maku'tsati  asked 
him  for  his  wife,  he  was  supposed  to  give  her  up,  or  they  would  jeer  him  all 
his  life.  If  he  should  give  her  up  and  take  her  back  again  after  a  few  days, 
he  likewise  became  a  laughing-stock. 

The  relations  between  male  and  female  fellow-jokers  are  illustrated  by 
some  of  Wolf-chief's  experiences.  When  he  was  a  young  man,  Corn-stalk 
and  Many-women  made  fun  of  him.  Both  of  them  had  made  tipi  decora 
tions,  which  accomplishment  corresponds  to  a  man's  honor  marks,  while  my 
informant  had  not  yet  struck  the  enemy  as  first-coup  man.  Corn-stalk 
sent  him  a  message,  saying  "  I  have  finished  my  tent  now  and  want  to  pitch 
it.  Wolf-chief  is  a  heavy  man,  so  I  shall  let  him  be  on  the  edge  of  the  tent 
:lest  the  wind  blow  it  away."  She  made  this  remark  because  on  account  of 
his  war  record  she  considered  Wolf-chief  inferior  to  other  maku'tsati.  He 
sent  back  word  to  this  effect :  "  They  are  right.  I  '11  be  glad  to  weight  down 
their  tent.  They  will  give  me  a  horse  for  that,  then  I'll  take  my  honor 
marks  on  them."  Once  he  went  on  a  war  party,  which  killed  two  women. 
He  took  off  their  dresses  and  put  their  bodies  together.  "  I  am  going  to  do 
this  to  Corn-stalk  and  Many-women,"  he  declared,  "then  I'll  give  them 
whatever  presents  they  may  name."  Wolf -chief  did  this  to  the  women  of 
the  hostile  camp.  The  two  fellow-jokers  sent  back  this  message:  "  Brother, 
we  don't  want  you  to  do  that,  we'll  never  bother  you  any  more."  Accord 
ing  to  old  Indian  custom,  Wolf-chief  would  have  been  permitted  to  carry 
out  his  threat. 

From  a  statement  of  Buffalo-bird-woman's  it  would  appear  that  those 
whose  fathers  belonged  to  the  same  moiety  were  also  maku'tsati,  for  she 
stood  in  this  relationship  to  her  own  father,  Small-ankle  of  the  miripa'ti 
clan,  since  his  father  had  been  an  i'ticu'xke,  i.  e.,  also  of  the  Four-clan 
moiety.  Small-ankle  would  chaff  his  daughter,  saying  to  her,  "I  am  a 
worker;  you  are  lazy."  On  one  occasion,  however,  she  got  even.  Her 
father  was  boasting  of  his  qualities  but  confessed  that  he  had  the  fault  of 
being  jealous :  — 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  45 

"  mi    arutsa'wi    ici'dtats.     mataruxpa'ka,        mata'  ixa,        ma  +  ici'  wa 
My         way      is  not  bad.    My  relatives,    my  connections,  I  make  them 
ne'  cdts,          ml       wa  ici'  dtats.     mawaki'rd  make'  +  its  mi 

nothing  bad.       I       am  not  stingy  I  hunt         I  do  it  for  them.         My 

arutsa'  wi      aru  +  icid       matuts :       mi'  +  awabcte  its. 
way  is  bad  some:  I  am  jealous." 

Punning  on  the  last  word,1  Buffalo-bird-woman  asked,  "who  bet  women 
in  gambling  so  that  Small-ankle  could  win  them?":  — 

'   "tape'wa        mi'd  aru -f  e'e        hewa,      na'xte  +  iv? 

"Who       is  it  that      women  (obj.)      bet,         you  won?" 

A  woman  who  was  present  laughed  at  this  sally,  and  Small-ankle  was 
ashamed  and  said  no  more. 

The  following  myth  is  told  about  the  ancient  practising  of  the  custom. 

First-maker  2  (I'  tsi  'ka  -wa'  hiric)  and  Spotted-tail  3  (Ts!'  ta-xavxi)  were  maku'- 
tsati  and  were  always  watching  each  other.  First-maker  hid  his  food  several  times 
and  Spotted-tail  appropriated  it.  One  day  Spotted-tail  took  all  his  food  and  roasted 
it.  First-maker  roasted  some  prairie-dogs  and  then  went  to  sleep.  So  Spotted-tail 
took  them  out  and  ate  them,  burying  the  bones.  First-maker  woke  up,  tracked 
Spotted-tail  and  found  him  asleep.  Taking  his  knife,  he  cut  open  his  back,  cut  out 
his  guts  and  stuffed  them  with  grass.  Then  he  said,  "Friend,  get  up  and  eat!" 
He  offered  him  his  own  guts.  Spotted-tail  ate  his  guts  and  found  the  taste  good. 
At  length  First-maker  said,  "Why,  you  have  eaten  your  own  guts!"  "What  are 
you  saying?"  Then  the  grass  came  out  of  him. 

One  day  First-maker  roasted  geese.  He  fell  asleep.  Spotted-tail  ate  up  all  the 
geese  and  buried  the  bones.  First-maker  tracked  him  into  a  thick  wood.  When  he 
got  there,  he  wished  to  kill  him.  He  pondered  where  to  hit  Spotted-tail,  "If  I  hit 
him  in  the  head,  then  there'll  be  some  blood  when  I  eat  him.  If  I  hit  his  backbone, 
it  will  be  the  same  way.  If  I  break  his  legs,  there  will  also  be  blood."  In  the 
meantime  Spotted-tail  woke  up  and  ran  away.  First-maker  could  not  catch  him, 
he  came  back  to  the  same  place.  "I  ought  to  have  done  this  way  to  him,"  he  said. 
He  struck  the  ground  with  a  stick,  breaking  the  stick  and  hitting  himself. 

One  day  First-maker  was  running  after  some  bone  grease.  It  jumped  into  the 
water.  First-maker  watched  for  it  to  come  out.  The  water  was  all  greasy.  First- 
maker  had  no  dipper  and  was  looking  about  for  some  hair  to  use  instead.  He  thought 
he  had  better  cut  off  his  tail.  He  did  so,  but  in  the  meantime  Spotted-tail  had 
already  used  the  hair  on  his  feet  to  dip  up  all  the  grease,  so  First-maker  had  cut  off 
his  tail  for  nothing.  lurst-maker  said,  "I  always  want  to  do  what  is  right  for  my 
maku'tsati  is  always  watching  me." 

This  was  the  beginning  of  the  maku'tsati  custom. 


1  mia  woman,  maxt.its,  I  win  in  gambling. 

2  The  Hidatsa  hero-trickster. 

3  This  animal  I  was  unable  to  identify;    Goodbird  said  it  was  extinct  in  the  region  in 
habited  by  the  Hidatsa. 


46  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

MARRIAGE. 

The  Hidatsa  and  Crow  agree  in  considering  marriage  by  purchase  as  the 
most  honorable  form  from  the  woman's  point  of  view;  but  among  the 
Hidatsa  I  got  the  impression,  which  I  did  not  receive  among  the  Crow,  that 
it  was  somewhat  discreditable  for  a  man  to  have  to  buy  a  wife.  Thus,  if 
one  man  had  married  his  sweetheart  without  such  formality  and  a  maku'- 
tsaii  who  had  bought  a  woman  made  any  comment  on  his  appearance,  he 
might  reply,  "  I  am  a  good-looking  man,  you  bought  a  woman  because  you 
are  ugly,"  and  this  silenced  the  joker. 

Great  stress  is  laid  in  nomenclature  on  whether  a  wife  has  been  previ 
ously  married  (p.  34),  and  I  found  that  such  a  woman  was  married  without 
purchase  and  without  aid  from  any  one  else.  When  a  young  man  bought  a 
girl,  his  parents  gave  horses  to  her  parents  and  vice  versa,  the  return  gift 
being  sometimes  of  greater  value.1  Only  a  woman  who  had  not  been 
previously  married  was  allowed  to  receive  sacred  objects  for  her  husband 
in  the  transfer  of  medicine  bundle  prerogatives. 

As  regards  residence,  there  does  not  seem  to  have  been  an  absolute  rule, 
but  apparently  in  the  beginning  the  young  couple  generally  took  up  their 
abode  with  the  wife's  parents,  the  husband  acting  as  their  servant  and  pro 
viding  them  with  food.  If  he  wished  to  give  away  a  horse,  he  would  ask 
permission  through  his  wife.  The  wife's  parents  treated  him  kindly  during 
this  period  and  if  they  had  a  horse  to  spare  they  would  give  it  to  their  daugh 
ter.  When  there  was  issue  from  the  union,  the  man  became  independent 
and  might  do  as  he  pleased  without  asking  leave. 

The  orthodox  form  of  polygamous  marriage  was  for  a  man  to  marry 
his  first  wife's  younger  sisters,  this  term  being  sometimes  used  in  a  classi- 
ficatory  sense.  The  native  theory  is  that  two  wives  who  were  not  so  related 
were  likely  to  quarrel.  The  special  term  iri'  kudts  (plural,  iri'  kuowaiu'}  is 
used  for  fellow-wives  who  do  not  get  along  with  each  other  (see  p.  35). 
Yellow-head  and  Cherry-woman,  who  were  not  sisters,  were  both  married 
to  Small-ankle.  One  day  they  quarreled.  Yellow-head  asked  her  mother 
to  give  Small-ankle  her  younger  sisters  for  wives.  "Then,"  she  said,  "I 
am  sure  Small-ankle  will  throw  Cherry-woman  away."  Accordingly, 
Small-ankle  married  four  younger  sisters,  three  of  them  being  full  sisters 
and  the  fourth  her  mother's  adopted  daughter.  Bears-looking  had  five 
wives, —  Otter,  Root,  Large,  Juneberry,  and  Corn-woman,  of  whom  the 
first  four  were  sisters.  All  of  them  stayed  together  for  a  long  time.  Sisters 
who  are  fellow-wives  do  not  dispute  but  help  one  another. 


Of.  Matthews,  52. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  47 

In  spite  of  the  considerable  looseness  which  prevailed  among  the  Hidatsa 
a  pure  woman  was  highly  esteemed.  "  If  a  woman  was  good  and  kind,  her 
husband  loved  her  whether  she  had  been  previously  married  or  not."  "  My 
husband  never  punished  me,  and  I  never  fought  him.  We  both  lived  well 
together.  I  was  never  foolish  or  bad,  my  husband  knew  it  and  never  got 
angry.  Some  husbands  nearly  killed  their  wives  because  they  went  with 
other  men." 

It  should  be  noted  that  to  exhibit  jealousy  publicly  was  to  expose  oneself 
to  ridicule  at  the  hands  of  the  maku'tsaii.  If  a  man  eloped  with  a  married 
woman,  the  husband  might  whip  the  adulterer,  who  was  not  permitted  to 
strike  back,  and  would  make  it  hard  for  his  wife  after  taking  her  back. 
But  the  jokers  would  make  fun  of  the  husband  for  his  actions.  Apparently 
the  proper  or  at  least  ideal  course  was  for  the  husband  to  let  his  wife  go 
without  protest.  On  this  point  my  data  entirely  corroborate  Matthews's 
statements.1 

In  case  of  a  divorce  the  children  remained  with  the  mother  and  ceased  to 
call  their  own  father  by  that  kinship  term,  which  was  transferred  to  their 
mother's  husband  if  she  remarried.  However,  the  real  father's  clansmen 
remained  the  children's  clan-fathers. 

The  levirate  was  in  vogue,  but  a  man  who  availed  himself  of  its  privileges 
might  be  derided  by  his  maku'tsati,  who  would  say,  "You  are  like  a  bad- 
looking  man,  you  are  keeping  your  brother's  wife,  you  could  not  get  a  woman 
otherwise."  But  the  people  at  large  regarded  marriage  with  a  deceased 
brother's  wife  as  perfectly  proper. 


ATTITUDE  TOWARD  RELATIVES  BY  MARRIAGE. 

Parents^in-law.  The  son-in-law  at  first  occupies  a  position  of  inferiority 
with  reference  to  his  wife's  parents,  his  status  being  somewhat  that  of  a 
hired  man,  to  use  my  interpreter's  analogy.  His  status  becomes  one  of 
independence,  however,  when  children  are  born. 

There  is  a  taboo  against  social  intercourse  between  the  son-in-law  on  the 
one  hand  and  his  wife's  father,  her  father's  brothers  and  sisters,  her  mother, 
mother's  sisters  and  grandmothers  on  the  other.  To  put  it  more  accu 
rately,  a  man  does  not  hold  conversation  with  those  persons  whom  his  wife 
addresses  as  i'ka',  baca'wi,  tate',  and  maku' '.  Parents-in-law  and  son-in-law 
never  pronounced  each  other's  names  and  were  not  permitted  to  use  any  word 
that  entered  into  the  names.  The  taboo  is  said  by  one  witness  to  have  held 


1  Matthews,  54. 


48  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

and  by  another  to  have  lapsed  after  the  wife's  death;  but  I  learned  of  no 
case  in  which  a  woman  adopted  a  deceased  daughter's  husband  as  a  son  by 
way  of  effacing  the  restrictions,  though  instances  of  this  type  were  noted 
among  the  Crow.  The  rule  of  avoidance  was  not  so  strict  between  a  man 
and  his  wife's  father  as  with  his  mother-in-law,  and  in  the  case  of  an  im 
portant  happening  the  ordinary  rule  was  broken,  the  father-in-law  being 
addressed  as  "old  man"  and  addressing  his  daughter's  husband  as  son.  In 
the  old  days  there  was  only  one  way  of  abolishing  the  mother-in-law  regula 
tion,  which  was  also  noted  by  Maximilian  for  both  the  Hidatsa  and  Mandan.1 
Once  Wolf-chief  wrent  against  the  Dakota,  struck  a  coup  as  the  third  man, 
and  cut  off  the  scalp,  which  he  saved.  When  he  got  home,  he  called  out 
to  his  wife's  mother,  "Mother,  I  have  brought  you  a  scalp."  She  replied, 
"Thank  you,  son,  I  am  glad  to  receive  it."  Thereafter  he  was  permitted 
to  converse  with  both  his  parents-in-lawT.  As  will  be  seen  presently,  this 
liberty  was  optional.  If  the  son-in-law  had  not  brought  home  a  scalp,  he 
would  not  even  face  towards  his  mother-in-law;  if  they  accidentally  ap 
proached  each  other,  they  would  get  scared  and  go  out  of  each  other's 
way. 

Two  concrete  instances  illustrate  the  native  point  of  view  with  regard  to 
these  observances,  which  are  considered  indicative  of  respect  and  in  no  way 
of  animosity.  Buffalo-bird-woman's  husband  brought  two  scalps  for  her 
mother  but  never  availed  himself  of  the  privilege  of  disregarding  the  rule 
of  avoidance:  "He  honored  her  too  much."  Another  case  is,  if  anything, 
even  more  instructive.  Joe  Packineau  is  married  to  an  Arikara  woman, 
whose  tribe  does  not  observe  the  avoidance  rule.  On  one  occasion  her 
mother  spoke  to  Joe  in  the  presence  of  some  of  his  Hidatsa  friends,  who  were 
very  much  shocked  and  said,  "What's  the  matter  with  your  mother-in-law, 
Joe?  She  does  not  seem  to  have  any  respect  for  you  at  all!" 

If  the  parents-in-law  wished  to  direct  their  son-in-law  to  do  something, 
they  would  employ  the  third  person  plural.  Thus,  to  an  ordinary  person 
they  would  say,  "mi'ri  ruwa'  aaku'"  "Wrater  some  bring"  (2nd  person 
imperative),  but  if  they  wanted  their  daughter's  husband  to  go  on  this 
errand  they  substituted,  "mi'ri  ruwa'  aakra'  hu  ta'pdk*,"  "Water  some 
they  bring  should." 

Daughter-in-law.  A  daughter-in-law  is  well  treated  by  her  husband's 
parents.  They  give  her  good  clothes  and  good  things  to  eat.  If  they  abused 
her,  the  people  would  disapprove  of  it. 

Brothers-in-law.  Brothers-in-law  love  each  other.  A  man  will  present 
his  sister's  husband  with  a  gun  and  horses,  and  on  the  other  hand  receives 

i  Maximilian,  n,  132. 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  49 

game  from  his  wife's  brother,  as  well  as  horses  captured  on  a  war  expedition. 
When  a  man  recites  his  coups,  he  will  say,  "  I  captured  a  horse  and  gave  it 
to  my  brother-in-law." 

As  already  noted,  a  man  may  jestingly  refer  to  his  wife's  brother  as  his 
wife  and  is  in  turn  called  husband.  This  mode  of  address  is  used  on  the 
battlefield.  If  a  wounded  man  catches  sight  of  his  sister's  husband,  he  will 
say,  "Husband,  I  am  getting  killed."  Then  his  brother-in-law,  if  a  brave 
man,  will  give  help  or  even  die  with  his  wife's  brother.  Unless  he  did  so, 
his  brother-in-law  would  jeer  at  him  for  his  cowardice,  saying,  "  My  husband 
is  like  a  woman,  he  left  me  alone."  A  man  who  has  captured  a  horse  will 
say  to  his  wife's  brother,  "  My  wife,  take  this  horse."  Otherwise  his  brother- 
in-law  will  say,  "My  husband  got  enemy's  horses  but  did  not  give  me  any, 
he  is  bad!"  If  a  man's  wife's  brothers  capture  horses  while  he  himself 
does  not,  he  is  ashamed  because  his  "wives"  are  braver  than  himself.  If  a 
man  is  sent  out  by  his  war  party  to  get  water  of  a  dark  night,  his  wife's 
brother  may  say,  "He  calls  me  'wife,'  yet  he  is  more  afraid  than  I  am." 
When  sent  for  water  by  one's  "wife,"  a  man  cannot  refuse  to  go. 

Sisters-in-law.  The  brother's  wife  (w.  sp.)  and  the  husband's  sister 
stand  on  a  footing  of  equality.  They  give  presents  to  each  other  and  poke 
fun  at  each  other  without  any  resentment.  Buffalo-bird-woman  often 
received  clothing  from  her  brother's  wife  and  several  times  presented  her 
with  horses. 

Man  and  Brother's  Wife.  If  a  man  died,  he  would  bequeath  his  wife  to 
his  younger  or  elder  brother,  even  if  she  was  older  than  the  legatee.  Certain 
aspects  of  this  levirate  marriage  are  discussed  under  another  heading. 

Doubtless  in  connection  writh  these  marital  rights,  a  man  was  permitted 
to  exhibit  considerable  freedom  in  intercourse  with  his  brother's  wife.  He 
might  play  with  her  and  use  funny  words  in  order  to  make  her  laugh. 
However,  he  did  not  actually  exercise  marital  rights  while  his  brother  was 
still  living. 

Brother-in-law  and  sister-in-law  laugh  at  each  other  and  try  to  make 
each  other  ashamed.  If  there  wras  an  ill-favored  girl  in  camp,  Buffalo- 
bird-woman  would  say  that  that  was  Bad-brave's  sweetheart.  He  would 
declare  that  some  bad-looking  man  was  her  husband  or  was  courting  her. 

A  woman  makes  moccasins  for  her  husband's  brother;  he  gives  her  a 
dress  or  blanket  and  money  he  has  won  at  gambling. 

Man  and  Wife's  Sisters.  In  the  old  days  a  man  who  married  the  eldest 
daughter  of  a  family  had  a  preemptive  right  to  her  younger  sisters  as  they 
grew  up.  Even  now  Goodbird  may  treat  his  wife's  sisters  with  great 
familiarity  and  may  make  fun  of  them,  chaffing  them  about  their  husbands 
and  sweethearts. 


50  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

Wife's  Brother's  Wife.  Unlike  the  Crow,1  the  Hidatsa  have  no  taboo 
against  social  relations  between  a  man  and  his  wife's  brother's  wife.  They 
talk  freely  and  are  expected  to  treat  each  other  kindly  and  not  cheat  each 
other.  There  is  mutual  respect  and  accordingly  no  undue  familiarity. 


COMRADES. 

Men  would  pair  off  as  I  raku'd,  comrades.  They  would  go  on  the  war 
path  together  and  neither  concealed  anything  he  did  from  the  other. - 
Hunts-alone,  of  the  Knife  clan  is  Goodbird's  comrade.  I  kooxpa'  is  the 
corresponding  term  used  by  a  woman  for  her  female  confidante.  Every 
girl  had  a  special  friend  of  this  type,  from  whom  she  would  not  keep  secret 
any  of  her  love  affairs  or  anything  her  lover  said. 

NAMES. 

When  a  child  was  about  ten  days  old,  the  parents  would  ask  some  rela 
tive  owning  a  medicine  bundle  to  name  it.  Names  designating  parts  of  the 
bear's  body  were  very  common. 

Buffalo-bird-woman  (waxi'ri  wi'dc)  was  at  first  named  by  Aru  wiri'tsa'kic 
(Watery-mush?),  one  of  her  grandmother's  brothers,  who  was  possessed  of 
supernatural  powers.  He  called  her  Oruwi'tsaki'c,  "  When-he-goes-he- 
always-has-good-luck."  But  she  was  often  sick  in  infancy,  so  her  father 
gave  her  a  new  name  to  make  her  strong.  Goodbird  was  so  named  by  his 
maternal  grandfather,  Small-ankle,  who  had  a  bird  for  his  medicine. 

The  importance  attached  by  the  Hidatsa  to  new  names  and  their  con 
nection  with  the  functions  of  the  father's  clan  mates  have  been  discussed 
under  another  heading  (p.  41). 

There  is  no  taboo  against  the  use  of  a  dead  person's  name.  That  of  a 
famous  warrior  may  be  conferred  on  a  young  man  who  has  distinguished 
himself  and  people  are  glad  to  hear  it  again.3 

A  few  additional  facts  are  noted  by  Matthews.  According  to  him,  a 
male  infant  sometimes  received  as  many  as  four  names  composed  of  the 
same  noun  with  different  adjectives;  but  only  one  of  these  was  commonly 
used. 

In  after  years,  the  names  of  the  miles  are  changed  once,  or  oftener,  or  rather  new 
names  are  given;  for  they  will  be  called  as  often  by  the  old  names  as  by  the  new. 


1  Lowie,  (c),  214. 

2  Lowie,  (c),  212. 

3  Of.  Matthews,  55. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  51 

The  first  new  name  is  usually  given  to  a  youth  after  he  has  first  struck  an  enemy  in 
battle.  The  names  of  women  are  rarely  changed.  Sometimes,  if  a  name  is  long,  a 
part  of  it  only  is  used  in  ordinary  conversation. 

Matthews  found  bashfulness  about  telling  one's  name  less  highly  developed 
among  the  Hidatsa  than  with  other  tribes:  some  individuals  would  answer 
reluctantly  or  refer  the  questioner  to  another  person  who  might  give  the 
required  information.1  Maximilian  states  that  when  an  infant  is  to  be 
named  the  father  goes  on  a  buffalo  hunt.  When  he  returns,  he  packs  from 
ten  to  twelve  large  pieces  of  meat  on  his  back,  putting  his  child  on  top. 
Staggering  under  the  load,  he  goes  to  the  medicineman  who  is  to  name  the 
child  and  presents  him  with  the  meat  as  his  fee.2 


BURIAL. 

The  burial  practices  of  the  Hidatsa  are  sociologically  interesting  because 
of  the  prominence  assumed  by  the  father's  clansmen.  This  feature  seems 
to  have  been  absent  among  the  Crow. 

Before  the  death  of  a  person  either  he  himself  or  one  of  his  relatives 
appoints  one  of  the  patient's  clan-fathers  or  aunts  to  conduct  the  funeral. 
The  individual  designated  collects  all  the  dying  person's  old  clothes  and 
receives  some  of  his  property  as  his  fee.  This  might  consist  of  either  horses 
or  guns,  these  being  considered  of  equivalent  value  in  the  old  days.  Some 
property  was  saved  for  the  widow.  For  example,  the  tipi  might  be  kept 
and  the  earth-lodge  always  was.  It  was  considered  miserly  for  the  master 
of  ceremonies  to  keep  all  his  fee  for  himself;  most  Hidatsa  in  this  position 
would  distribute  gifts  among  their  friends. 

When  the  patient's  death  was  approaching,  the  father's  clansman  who 
directed  the  proceedings,  washed  and  painted  his  clan  son's  face  and  dressed 
him  up  as  though  in  preparation  for  a  visit  to  other  people;  marks  indicative 
of  his  war  honors  were  put  on  the  dying  man.  When  he  had  breathed  his 
last,  the  family  and  also  the  master  of  ceremonies  gashed  their  arms  and 
legs  with  sharp  flint  knives,  cut  off  their  hair  and  some  of  the  finger-joints, 
and  sometimes  stabbed  their  heads  with  an  awl  or  knife  so  that  the  blood 
would  flow  down.  All  the  father's  clansfolk  wept  over  their  lost  "son." 
The  corpse,  stretched  out  on  a  robe,  was  formally  borne  to  the  graveyard 
by  four  or  more  clan-fathers  or  aunts. 

\\olf-chief  says  that  two  modes  of  burial  were  in  vogue  and  the  one 
preferred  by  the  dying  man  was  followed.  One  method  was  that  of  actual 


i  ibid.,  54  f. 

1  Maximilian,  H,  217. 


52  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

interment,  the  director  digging  a  pit  into  which  the  body  was  lowered. 
Pieces  of  wood  were  placed  on  top  and  the  hole  was  filled  in  with  earth. 
The  second  way  was  scaffold  burial,  in  which  case  four  forked  posts  were 
set  in  the  ground  and  the  corpse  was  secured  by  means  of  ropes.  Maxi 
milian  mentions  both  forms  of  burial  but  according  to  him  it  was  only  the 
bad  people  who  quarrel  and  kill  one  another  that  were  interred.  In  this 
case  a  buffalo  skull  was  laid  on  the  grave  lest  the  herds  should  move  away 
and  fail  to  return  when  they  scented  the  wicked  persons.  The  good  were 
placed  on  stages  so  that  the  Master  of  Life  might  see  them.1 

In  depositing  the  body  the  clan  father  thus  addressed  it:  "My  son,  do 
not  look  backwards  but  go  to  the  ghost  land.  You  will  meet  many  of  your 
beloved  ones  there.  You  must  not  expect  us,  your  family  are  remaining 
here.  Go  alone.  We  are  poor."  This  speech  sends  the  spirit  to  the  land 
of  ghosts.  If  some  person  not  a  clan  father  spoke  thus,  the  spirit  would  not 
go  to  the  ghost  land  but  would  get  lost.  When  the  corpse  had  been  buried, 
the  director  of  ceremonies  took  some  sage,  rubbed  it  into  a  ball  and  gave  it 
to  each  person  who  had  touched  the  corpse  in  order  to  ward  off  illness  from 
all  concerned. 


1  Maximilian,  n,  235. 


1917.]  Loune,  Man  dan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  53 


SUPPLEMENTARY  NOTES  ON  THE  SOCIAL  LIFE  OF 
THE   CROW. 

CLANS. 

Later  investigation  has  established  the  essential  correctness  of  the  data 
presented  in  my  former  publication.  That  is  to  say,  the  Crow  were  divided 
into  thirteen  exogamous  matrilineal  clans  linked  together  in  six  loose 
phratries,  most  if  not  all  of  which  were  non-exogamous. 

In  an  unusually  careful  study  of  my  earlier  paper l  Doctor  Golden- 
weiser  has  suggested  that  the  Crow,  like  the  Hidatsa,  once  possessed  the 
dual  organization.  Its  absence  is  of  course  one  of  the  striking  cultural 
traits  of  the  Crow  when  compared  with  their  next  of  kin,  as  I  have  myself 
pointed  out.  I  was  at  one  time  inclined  to  explain  the  difference  by  assum 
ing  that  the  Hidatsa  adopted  their  moiety  system  from  the  Mandan.  For 
reasons  given,  which  I  admit  are  not  decisive,  I  now  rather  favor  the 
hypothesis  that  the  Hidatsa  moieties  are  older  than  those  of  the  Mandan. 
This  view  lends  somewhat  greater  a  priori  plausibility  to  the  one-time 
existence  of  the  dual  division  among  the  Crow.  Nevertheless,  the  fact 
remains  that  of  any  such  organization  no  trace  is  perceptible. 

The  etymologies  of  the  clan  names,  which  owing  to  the  sometimes 
extraordinary  contraction  of  words,  were  not  always  correctly  rendered  in 
my  earlier  publication,  are  given  below  in  accordance  with  the  latest  inter 
pretations  secured. 

1.  a'cirari'o;    ace',  lodge;    hira',  just  now;    ri'o,  they  made.     Newly- 
made  Lodge. 

2.  acitsi'te;    ace',  lodge;    citsi'te,  thick.     Thick  Lodge. 

3.  acl' oce;    ace,  lodge;    I,  lip,  mouth;    5'ce,  cooked,  scalded.     Sore-lip 
Lodge. 

4.  u'  wutacev;   u'wu,  the  inside  of  the  mouth;   tace,  greasy.     Greasy  in 
side  the  mouth. 

5.  u'sawatsid;  u,  they  shoot,  hit;  sa,  not;   batsi'd,  to  hunt,  bring  game. 
Without  shooting  they  bring  game. 

6.  xu'xkaraxtse' ;  xu'xka,  in  a  knot;  daxtse',  to  tie.     Tied  in  a  knot. 

7.  acpenuce;  ace,  lodge;  pe're,  filth;  du'ce,  to  eat.     Filth-eating  Lodge. 

8.  e'raraplo;   e're,  belly;   arapl' o,  they  kick.     Kicked  in  the  Belly. 


Goldenweiser,  281-294. 


54  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

9.     ack-a'pkawivd;  ack-a'pe,  war  honor;  xawi'd,  bad.     Bad  War  Honors. 

10.  birik-o'oce;   hire',  water;   k'o' oce,  to  whistle.     Whistling  Water. 

11.  acxatse';   ace',  lodge;  xatse',  streak.     Streaked  Lodge. 

12.  ack-a'mne;  ace',  lodge;  k'a'mne,  Piegan.     Piegan  Lodge. 

13.  a'cbatcu'd;  ace,  lodge;  batcu'd,  awl,  treacherous.     Treacherous  Lodge. 
There  was  hitherto  some  doubt,  which  cannot  yet  be  resolved,  as  to 

whether  the  ack-a'mne  and  the  a'cbatcu'd  were  distinct  clans  or  whether 
these  were  merely  two  names  for  the  same  division.1  According  to  Hillside 
they  were  distinct,  intermarried,  and  like  other  linked  clans  gave  mutual 
aid :  — 

"ack-a'mne  a'cbatcu'd  bats-axpuk', 

"The  Piegan  clan  the  Treacherous  clan  each  other  they  married, 

bats-k'uxsu'kV 
each  other  they  helped." 

Though  tJ'uciec  denied  this,  saying  that  ack-a'mne  and  a'cbatcu'd 
were  only  two  of  four  different  names  applied  to  the  same  clan,  he  gave 
corresponding  testimony  respecting  several  other  linked  clans.  The  a'cira- 
rl'o  and  acitsi'te,  he  said,  " ru'pe  +  uk,  du'pta,  wats  —  a'xpa'kvk',  i.  e., 
"They  are  two,  separate,  they  intermarried  continually."  He  made  the 
same  statement  for  the  u'wutace'  and  acl'  oce;  the  acpenuce,  xu'xkaraxtse, 
u'sawatsi'd;  and  the  erarapPo  and  ack-apkawi'd.  On  the  other  hand, 
he  asserted  that  the  acxatse',  birik-o'oce,  tsi'pawal'itse  and  acbatsi'rice 
were  only  several  names  for  a  single  clan. 

In  short,  the  evidence  remains  contradictory  as  to  the  same  two  groups 
as  before,2  while  the  distinctness  of  the  linked  clans  in  the  four  other  divi 
sions  may  be  considered  as  definitely  established. 

There  are  several  versions  of  a  tale  recounting  a  conflict  between  the 
ack-a'mne  and  birik-o'oce. 

Like  the  Abderites  among  the  Greeks  and  the  natives  of  Schilda  in 
German  folklore,  the  people  of  the  Bad  War  Honor  (ack-apkawid)  clan 
enjoy  the  reputation  of  proverbial  stupidity.  The  people  say,  "  ack  •  dpkawld 
wara'xuk*,"  "The  Bad  War  Honors  are  crazy."  A  few  anecdotes  were 
retailed  to  illustrate  their  folly. 

Once"  they  were  all  camped  together  when  the  Piegan  attacked  them. 
The  men  and  women  all  took  to  the  woods  except  for  one  young  man  who 
climbed  a  tree.  The  enemy  at  first  did  not  see  him.  After  a  while  they 
cut  up  a  tipi  near-by.  One  of  them  opened  a  bag  and  took  out  some  buck- 


i  Lowie,  (c),  192. 
!  Lowie,  (c),  194. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  55 

skin.     The  man  hiding  said,  "  Don't  take  that,  the  owner  is  no  good." 
Then  the  Piegan  caught  sight  of  him  and  killed  him. 

On  another  occasion  an  ack  •  ap  kawid  saw  another  Crow  wearing  beaded 
buckskin  leggings  with  red  fringes.  He  asked  how  they  had  been  made. 
The  owner  told  him  to  take  the  leggings  to  his  wife  and  have  her  cut  them 
after  the  same  pattern,  then  he  should  kill  a  buffalo,  bring  its  bones  home, 
boil  them  till  the  grease  rose  to  the  top,  cool  the  grease,  plunge  his  leggings 
into  it  and  place  them  under  his  bed  on  the  ground.  "The  next  morning, 
when  you  get  up,  they  will  be  just  like  mine."  The  ack  apkawid  followed 
these  directions,  but  when  he  got  up  the  next  morning  his  leggings  were  so 
greasy  that  he  did  not  know  what  to  do  with  them;  he  hung  them  up  and 
sent  for  his  adviser.  When  the  man  saw  the  leggings  he  gave  him  his  own. 

Magpie,  who  was  still  living  at  the  time  the  tale  was  told  about  him, 
once  took  a  Crow  of  his  own  age  for  a  Piegan  and  invited  him  to  his  house 
by  means  of  gestures,  asking  how  long  he  had  been  on  the  Reservation.  It 
was  only  when  the  supposed  foreigner  spoke  in  Crow  that  Magpie  found 
out  his  mistake.  He  could  not  do  anything  about  it  for  he  had  already 
given  him  food.  The  reason  for  his  misunderstanding  was  that  he  had 
seen  someone  else  making  signs  to  this  Crow.  On  another  occasion  Magpie 
wished  to  call  Lewis  Moccasin  by  name  but  instead  he  uttered  his  own  Crow* 
name  a'k'e  wird  xbd'k'c,  "Indian."  Magpie's  wife  has  told  other  people 
that  her  husband  once  put  on  his  moccasins  on  the  wrong  side  and  never 
noticed  it  till  his  attention  was  called  thereto.  My  interpreter  has  heard 
people  say  that  Magpie  once  tried  to  strike  mice  with  a  pitchfork  but 
struck  his  own  foot.  In  talking  about  Magpie  the  Crow  were  wont  to  say, 
"  ack •  dp  kawik&ce,"  "He  is  a  genuine  ack- apkawid,"  (ka/ce  is  the  super 
lative  suffix). 

In  accordance  with  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  custom  of  giving  nicknames 
for  peculiarities  evinced  by  one's  father's  clansfolk  (p.  41)  the  Crow  are 
in  the  habit  of  throwing  into  a  person's  teeth  the  fact  that  his  father  is  of 
the  notoriously  foolish  clan.  When  a  boy  whose  father  is  an  ack- apkawid 
does  something  silly,  people  say,  "He  is  one  of  those  who  told  the  enemy 
not  to  take  the  buckskin,"  or,  "  He  is  one  of  those  who  boiled  their  leggings." 
Medicine-crow's  real  father  was  an  ack- apkawid.  When  Medicine-crow 
has  done  anything  wrong  his  wife  scoffs  at  him,  saying,  "  irupxembicd 
ack-dpkau'a'u —  racen."  "He  has  the  Bad  Honors  for  fathers,  that  is 
why."  This  seems  to  correspond  exactly  to  our  saying,  "That's  the  Irish 
of  it." 

It  was  principally  a  man's  wife,  his  brothers'  or  clan-brothers'  wives, 

;  Moaning  presumably,  that  it  was  dangerous  to  trifle  with  his  property. 


56  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

and  his  joking-relatives  who  made  fun  of  him  for  being  a  typical  ack-ap- 
kawid.  Gray-bull  did  not  make  fun  of  Magpie  because  Magpie's  son, 
Yellow-brow,  was  Gray-bull's  son-in-law. 

The  custom  of  giving  presents  to  father's  clansmen  was  described  in  my 
earlier  paper.  I  have  since  repeatedly  obtained  a  traditional  justification 
of  the  usage,  the  same  motive  being  always  apparent.  A  brief  version 
follows. 

Three  young  men  were  friends.  They  said,  "Let  us  do  something.  To  one 
they  said,  "Do  you  frequently  build  sweatlodges  and  go  into  them."  To  the  second 
they  said,  "Give  presents  to  the  Sun  all  the  time."  To  the  third  they  said,  "Always 
give  food  to  your  a'sa  'ke.  "They  were  going  to  see  who  would  live  longest.  The 
one  who  gave  presents  to  the  Sun  became  a  chief  but  he  was  the  first  to  be  killed. 
The  one  who  built  sweatlodges  was  killed  when  he  was  only  fairly  old.  But  the  one 
who  entertained  his  father's  clansmen  lived  to  be  very  old.  Since  then  we  have 
given  food  to  our  clan-fathers.  We  never  passed  in  front  of  them  unless  we  had 
previously  given  them  a  present. 

Young-crane  thought  marrying  into  her  father's  clan  was  as  bad  as 
marrying  into  her  own,  for  then  she  would  call  her  husband  "father." 
Accordingly,  though  she  was  sought  in  marriage  by  acl'oce  men  she  declined 
-to  have  anything  to  do  with  them.  However,  she  added  that  women  did 
marry  father's  clansmen  provided  they  were  not  closely  related.  This 
agrees  essentially  with  previous  information.1 


TEEMS  OF  RELATIONSHIP. 

Further  study  has  convinced  me  of  the  correctness  of  a  statement  made 
in  my  previous  publication,  viz.,  that  nothing  short  of  a  perfect  knowledge 
of  the  Crow  language  suffices  to  ensure  an  absolutely  trustworthy  and 
complete  description  of  the  Crow  kinship  terminology.  However,  I  have 
been  able  by  repeated  inquiries  and,  still  more  important,  by  direct  observa 
tion  in  the  field  and  examination  of  texts  recorded  by  myself,  to  revise  and 
amplify  my  original  account.2 

The  most  serious  error  in  my  former  list  relates  to  the  designation  of  the 
father's  sister's  children,  who  are  not  classed  with  brothers  and  sisters  but 
are  set  in  the  first  ascending  generation, —  the  sons  of  the  paternal  aunt 
with  the  father  and  her  daughters  with  herself.  In  short,  Crow  usage 
coincides  in  this  respect  with  that  of  the  Hidatsa.  My  error  seems  the  less 
pardonable  because  the  essential  facts  had  already  been  grasped  by  Morgan. 


1  Lowie,   (c),  201. 

2  Lowio,  (c),  207  et  seq. 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  57 

A  painstaking  analysis  of  my  old  data  on  Crow  nomenclature  has  been 
published  by  Doctor  A.  A.  Goldenweiser,1  who  rightly  criticised  my  method 
of  objective  enumeration  of  meanings,  which  made  no  attempt  at  bringing 
out  the  rationale  of  the  system.  Though  I  am  very  appreciative  of  the  care 
this  author  has  devoted  to  the  examination  of  my  list,  I  am  unable  to  accept 
as  valid  any  of  his  other  comments  of  a  theoretical  nature.  For  one  thing, 
the  Crow  system  is  not  based  on  a  single  principle  of  classification  but  on  a 
number  of  disparate  and  in  part  contradictory  principles.  Thus,  the 
occurrence  of  a  specific  term  for  the  paternal  aunt  in  the  absence  of  a  corre 
lative  for  the  nephew  or  niece  is  an  inconsistency.  While  certain  portions 
of  the  nomenclature  undoubtedly  form  organic  units,  this  certainly  does 
not  apply  to  the  entire  series  and  accordingly  it  seems  wrong  to  generalize 
that  "the  principles  of  classification  on  which  such  systems  rest  always 
prove  exceedingly  simple  and,  as  soon  as  revealed,  serve  to  coordinate  the 
apparently  complex  series  of  terms."  Secondly,  Doctor  Goldenweiser 
arbitrarily  excludes  a  number  of  terms  on  the  ground  that  they  are  "not 
terms  of  relationship,"  among  them  bacbl'd,  my  fellow-clanswoman,  liter 
ally,  "my  wToman."  The  fact  is  that  most  of  these  terms  are  actually 
applied  by  the  natives  as  terms  of  relationship  and  the  phonetic  equivalent 
of  the  one  cited  is  the  regular  Hidatsa  word  for  elder  sister  (m.  sp.).  Further, 
a  combination  of  stems  rejected  by  Doctor  Goldenweiser  is  the  normal  way 
of  referring  to  a  son  or  daughter  non-vocatively.  Doctor  Goldenweiser 
cannot  seriously  suggest  the  elimination  of  all  terms  of  which  the  etymologi 
cal  derivation  is  established.  Thirdly,  I  have  never  succeeded  in  grasping 
the  advantage  of  the  diagrammatic  form  of  presentation  used  by  Doctor 
Goldenweiser  and  other  Americanists.  If  I  adopted  any  scheme  of  this  sort, 
I  should  prefer  that  of  J.  O.  Dorsey  in  his  tabulation  of  the  Omaha  system; 
but  I  do  not  consider  this  indispensable.  Finally,  I  am  obliged  to  challenge 
the  method  of  reconstructing  the  pristine  Crow  system  without  a  considera 
tion  of  all  other  available  Siouan  terminologies  or  those  of  other  tribes  his 
torically  connected  with  the  Crow.  Conclusions  based  solely  on  the  Crow  list 
necessarily  suffer  from  excessive  rationalization  and  must  be  purely  specula 
tive.  Thus,  Doctor  Goldenweiser  contends  that  because  man  and  woman 
use  diverse  terms  for  the  father,  there  must  once  have  been  a  similar  dicho 
tomy  in  the  designation  of  the  mother.  Yet  Professor  Kroeber  long  ago 
pointed  out  that  the  majority  of  Indian  categories  are  expressed  only  in  part 
of  their  nomenclatures  and  that  complete  consistency  in  this  respect  would 
involve  a  monstrous  wealth  of  terminology.  Similarly,  how  many  Indian 
tongues  consistently  discriminate  the  sex  of  the  speaker  in  all  the  clesigna- 

1  288  «t  seq. 


58  Anthropological  Papers  American  Miiseum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

tions  of  elder  and  younger  GescJiwistert  It  is,  therefore,  simply  an  instance 
of  the  rationalistic  fallacy  to  infer  the  former  existence  of  separate  male  and 
female  terms  for  elder  sister  and  younger  brother  from  the  corresponding 
sex-discrimination  in  dealing  with  the  elder  brother  and  younger  sister. 

In  order  to  comprehend  the  Crow  system  a  number  of  linguistic  points 
must  be  understood. 

batst'  is  the  regular  word  for  "man,"  bl'd  for  "woman,"  dd'k(e)  for 
"child,"  the  suffix  ka'ta  has  a  diminutive  meaning  with  the  secondary 
sense  of  endearment,  while  kari'cta  rather  indicates  mature  youth  (bl'akd'ta, 
"girl,"  bl'akari'cta,  "young  woman").  kd'are  is  the  normal  expression  for 
"old  woman,"  ise  (isd)  means  "big,  old"  and  an  obvious  derivative,  isaf'ka 
is  the  word  for  "old  man;"  bats  is  the  reciprocal  prefix. 

As  to  the  use  of  pronouns  with  stems,  certain  differences  are  worth  noting. 
A  number  of  vocative  terms,  e.  g.,  axe',  "father,"  entirely  lack  a  pronominal 
prefix.  In  perhaps  a  majority  of  cases  there  is  contraction  of  the  possessive 
pronouns,  bos-,  dis-,  is-,  which  are  ordinarily  used  with  vocables  other  than 
those  GJ  relationship,  by  eliminating  the  final  s.  Thus,  we  find  bard'ace, 
dird'ace,  ird'acc  for  the  brother-in-law  term.  Sometimes  the  simple  stem  has 
a  potential  third  person  possessive  meaning  and  cannot  take  the  prefix  i, 
while  the  other  persons  merely  prefix  b  and  d.  Thus,  we  have  bua,  dua,  ua, 
the  last  form  meaning  both  "his  wife"  and  "wife"  in  the  abstract.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  ordinary  possessives  are  employed  in  some  cases,  e.  g., 
basbd'xid,  disbdxi'd,  isbd^  xld,  "paternal  aunt."  In  at  least  two  cases 
where  the  simple  stem  has  a  potential  third-person  meaning,  the  second 
person  is  formed  not  with  di  but  with  da,  viz.,  datsire,  "your  husband," 
dard'ke,  "your  child." 

In  a  number  of  cases  the  change  from  vocative  to  non-vocative  coin 
cides  with  a  change  of  terminal  a  to  e.  This  usage  is  not  without  corre 
spondence  in  other  departments  of  the  language.  Thus,  the  culture-hero, 
Isa"kawudte,  is  addressed  as  "Isa'  'kawudta." 

Phonetically,  it  is  necessary  to  note  that  initial  b  and  m,  which  I  preserve 
in  accordance  with  my  previous  orthography  represent  a  'single  phonetic 
element, — weakly  nasalized  b;  further,  that  this  sound  regularly  becomes 
w  in  intervocalic  position. 

As  regards  Crow-Hidatsa  correspondences,  the  most  striking  ones  have 
been  correctly  summarized  by  Matthews1:  Crow  c  or  s  is  the  equivalent 
of  Hidatsa  1;  Crow  n  of  Hidatsa  dz;  Crow  k  of  Hidatsa  ts. 

There  are  certain  generic  expressions  for  relatives,  the  precise  delimita- 

»  78  et  seq. 


1917.]  Lowe,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  59 

tion  of  which  is  not  easy.  In  asking  a  person  what  his  relationship  is  to 
another,  the  approved  query  is:  diri'  co'°tat  "Your  relative  what  sort  of?" 
The  same  root  is  employed  in  the  worst  insult  that  can  be  hurled  at  a  Crow: 
di  ak-irl'-haire,  "You  are  one  whose  relatives  are  non-existent  (destroyed)."  1 
I  do  not  remember  hearing  this  stem  used  with  the  first  person  pronoun. 
Another  commonly  used  expression  is  birdxbci'ke,  the  normal  word  for 
"  person"  and  "  people" ;  it  seems  to  me  to  be  used  very  freely,  as  Americans 
use  the  word  "folks."  Linguistically,  it  may  be  noted  that  the  unabbre 
viated  pronominal  forms,  such  as  are  prefixed  to  vocables  other  than  rela 
tionship  terms,  are  used  with  this  word.  We  find,  e.  g.,  bais-is-birdxba'kua, 
"They  are  one  another's  relatives."  In  prayer  a  man  will  say,  "bas- 
birdxbd'kc  itse  awl'rupe  awa'wi,"  "My  people  (obj.)  safely  (to)  the  next 
year  may  I  bring  them."  The  expression  was  used, to  denote  the  relation 
ship  between  linked  clans:  the  crarapl'u  and  ack-apkawiva  were  said  to  be 
is-birdxba'kua,  one  of  the  other.  Exactly  the  same  meaning  was  ascribed 
to  another  word  sa'pc,  which  interrogatively  means  "what  ?  "  declaratively 
"something,"  the  idea  being  apparently  that  relatives  are  "something" 
to  one  another.  Thus,  the  acitsite  and  acirarl'o  were  said  to  be  bats-isa' puk, 
"  reciprocally  their  relatives  they  are."  The  statement  was  added  that 
sa'pe  is  applicable  to  one's  own  as  well  as  to  the  linked  clan.  Another 
authority  extended  it  to  the  father's  clan.  Another  interrogative,  cd'°*ta, 
occurs  with  a  similar  generic  meaning  of  relationship.  In  a  myth  both 
these  words  occur  in  close  juxtaposition:  isd'pu  rdk  ak-bats-ico"ta-kacV-rdk 
a'su'rdk',  "Their  relatives  and  those  who  were  very  closely  related  many 
had  died."  Here  the  jdea  of  closeness  is  not  embodied  in  the  stem  but  in 
the  usual  superlative  suffix  kaci. 


TERMS  OF  CONSANGUINITY. 

Speaker's  Generation.  In  order  to  avoid  repetition,  I  state  at  the  outset 
that  as  in  Hidatsa  nomenclature  parallel  cousins  are  brothers  and  sisters 
while  cross-cousins  are  placed  in  other  generations.  Male  clansfolk  are 
brothers,  female  members  of  one's  clan  and  generation  are  sisters. 

bl'ik-a  (m.  sp.).  My  elder  brother,  mother's  brother,  mother's  mother's 
brother.  I  doubt  whether  my  earlier  statement  that  this  term  was  applied 
to  a  maternal  uncle,  whether  older  or  younger,  holds,  for  it  seems  to  desig 
nate  fundamentally  relative  seniority  of  the  person  denoted;  obviously  in 
most  cases  the  uncle  would  be  older  than  the  nephew. 


Of.  Lowie,  (c),  245. 


60  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

matsu'ka.  My  younger  brother  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  sister's  son  (m.  sp.), 
[sister's  husband  younger  than  myself  (w.  sp.)]. 

basa'kaHa  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.).  My  elder  sister.  This  word  is  clearly  a 
derivative  from  masa'ke,  "my  mother,"  and  the  diminutive  suffix;  in  other 
words  its  literal  meaning  is  "little  mother." 

basa'tsi'ita  (m.  sp.).     My  younger  sister,  sister's  daughter. 

basa'are  (w.  sp.).  My  elder  brother,  mother's  brother,  mother's  mother's 
brother,  [husband's  brother]. 

baso/0ka  (w.  sp.).     My  younger  sister. 

makukata  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.).  My  elder  sister,  [brother's  wife  older  than 
I].  This  word  is  possibly  restricted  to  vocative  use.  In  both  senses  the 
proper  vocative  correlative  is  xu'utsc,  though  this  word  perhaps  more  fre 
quently  means  "daughter"  than  either  "younger  sister"  or  "younger 
sister-in-law."  I  believe  that  maku  kata  is  the  diminutive  survival  of  the 
Hidatsa  word  maku,  "my  grandmother." 

bakupe  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.).  My  brother  or  sister.  This  term  may  be 
applied  to  fellow-clansfolk,  as  when  a  man  who  has  married  within  the  clan 
is  spoken  of:  " akupc  dxpec,"  "He  has  married  his  sister."  But  this  strikes 
me  as  deliberate  extension  of  the  original  meaning  for  the  purpose  of  em 
phasizing  the  impropriety  of  non-exogamous  unions.  According  to  Shell- 
necklace,  brothers  and  sisters  sharing  at  least  one  parent,  moreover  the 
children  of  two  brothers  and  two  sisters  were  bats-akupud,  while  mere 
clansmen  were  one  another's  basa'ape  (see  p.  59).  Flat-back  went  so  far  as 
to  limit  the  term  akupe  to  persons  sharing  both  parents,  but  this  was 
challenged  by  all  other  informants. 

bacbatse'  and  bacbl'd,  "my  man"  and  "my  woman,"  are  used  generically 
for  own  and  clan  Geschwister,  regardless  of  relative  seniority.  Thus,  in 
describing  the  proper  form  of  marriage  an  informant  said  that  the  bride's 
brothers,  ic-batse'-o,  received  horses.  It  was  said  that  bacbl'd  is  not  used 
of  little  girls  if  they  are  own  sisters- but  may  be  applied  in  any  case  to  more 
remote  "sisters,"  and  that  the  term* was  used  preferentially  for  adoptive 
and  clan  sisters. 

In  addressing  a  younger  brother,  or  perhaps  any  other  younger  male 
relative,  the  terms  cik-d  (-akc),  "boy"  and  bard'a,r(a),  "crazy  one"  are 
sometimes  employed.  Correspondingly,  mi'aka'te,  "girl",  is  used  for  a 
younger  sister  or  female  relative. 

The  Geschwister  nomenclature  is  well  illustrated  in  mythological  texts. 
In  the  Bear-woman  tale  there  figure  two  sisters  and  their  six  brothers. 
The  younger  girl  calls  her  elder  sister  maku'  kaVa  and  is  in  turn  addressed 
as  ocu'utsc.  On  the  other  hand,  the  more  common  terms  for  elder  or  younger 
sister  repeatedly  occur  in  non-vocative  usage.  Thus,  the  brothers  say  to 
the  little  girl,  disa  V«7Yc  k'u,  "To  your  elder  sister  give  it;"  and  in  defining 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  61 

the  little  girl's  age  the  narrator  said,  pointing  to  his  own  grandchild,  iso'ke 
I'mbe  kara-k'ukl'  ima'tsik,  "Her  younger  sister  may  have  been  of  the  size  of 
that  one."  From  this  it  might  be  inferred  that  basa'kaf*ta  and  basd'°ka 
are  merely  non-vocative  stems.  But  since  they  were  given  to  me  in  pre 
cisely  this  form,  i.  e.,  with  the  vocative  ending,  I  believe  that  they  are 
correct  vocative  terms  which  may  be  transformed  to  the  non-vocative  by 
change  of  final  a  to  e;  and  that  maku'  kfrta  and  xu'utse  are  simply  supple 
mentary  and  optional  vocative  forms. 

In  the  same  myth  the  customary  word  is  regularly  used  for  a  female's 
elder  brother.  Thus,  the  girl  says,  masa^re,  da'raxta  sapat  "Elder  brother, 
don't  you  know  what  (it  is)?"  And  non-vocatively  we  find,  isd're  i  +  a'- 
kawu^rdk  duxira  +  -u'tseru^k,  "Her  elder  brothers,  six  of  them,  had  gone 
on  a  war  party."  On  the  other  hand,  the  girl,  probably  on  account  of  her 
youth,  is  addressed  as  bl'akaVe,  "  girl,"  but  referred  to  by  the  usual  specific 
term,  e.  g.,  isa'tsi'tucc  isd'cg-ckackd'tbicVtseruk,  "Their  younger  sister  had 
a  little  dog,  it  is  said."  When  the  wicked  sister  sees  that  she  is  getting  the 
worst  of  the  contest,  she  tries  softer  measures,  saying  to  the  little  girl,  di 
bakupkcTt  b&  -+-  ic,  "You  (as)  my  little  sister  I'll  treat."  Here  the  diminu 
tive  probably  has  rather  the  sense  of  endearment,  as  it  undoubtedly  has  in 
another  myth  where  adults  are  thus  addressed,  bakupkd'ta,  bl  wateeek'tt't*, 
"My  dear  brothers  and  sisters,  I  am  poor."  This  example  incidentally 
illustrates  the  vocative  use  of  the  term. 

The  usual  words  for  elder  and  younger  brother  (w.  sp.)  constantly  occur 
in  the  texts.  In  the  tale  of  a  wicked  brother-in-law  who  had  plotted  to  eat 
his  elder  brother's  wife,  the  woman,  after  saving  her  husband  from  starva 
tion,  thus  addresses  him:  ditsu'kc  bl  ru'cbid-sd'-rdk,  ku'  au'd'rdk',  lrlnmdVsik, 
"  Your  younger  brother  if  he  had  not  wished  to  eat  me,  him  also  I  should 
have  brought  with  me,  he  would  be  living."  In  accordance  with  the  usual 
inclusiveness  of  Indian  terms  and  the  disinclination  to  employ  proper  names 
in  address,  we  find  these  terms  extended  to  individuals  where  there  is  no 
evidence  of  blood-kinship.  In  the  tradition  of  the  separation  of  the  Crow 
and  Hidatsa,  a  member  of  the  aggrieved  party  enters  the  chief's  lodge  and 
says,  bl'ik-a,  ba^mdl-watsiice'  wi^awak',  "Elder  brother,  I  want  to  tell  you 
something."  In  an  Old-Man-Coyote  tale  the  trickster  meets  a  buffalo 
calf,  which  he  at  once  regards  as  his  younger  brother:  batsu'k  hine'm 
batefck-d't*,  "This  younger  brother  of  mine  is  poor;"  in  turn  the  calf  ad 
dresses  him  as  follows,  blnk-a,  k'an-dapdcek-,  "My  elder  brother,  you  are 
tired  now."  Similarly,  in  asking  some  ducks  to  dive  for  land,  Old-Man- 
Coyote  addresses  them  as  matsii'  kd'lu,  "My  dear  younger  brothers." 

It  is  interesting  to  find  that  in  the  story  of  the  twin  boys  the  heroes 
uniformly  address  each  other  as  bard'ax(a),  "  Crazy  one." 

cik-(i,  of  the  same  stem  as  cik-a'*ke,  "boy,"  is  not  necessarily  limited  to 


62 


Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 


relatives  but  seems  to  be  a  friendly  greeting  between  males.  For  example, 
in  the  myth  of  the  Bungling  Host,  Old-Man-Coyote  thus  addresses  the  Owl. 

Since  the  son  of  a  Crow's  paternal  aunt  is  addressed  as  a  father 
the  father's  sister's  son's  son  is  a  "  brother,"  and  the  father's  sister's  son's 
daughter  a  "  sister." 

The  characteristic  disregard  of  generations  may  be  clearly  illustrated 
with  the  aid  of  the  following  diagram. 


Wi  ='Old  Dog  Old  Dog's  sister  =  Hi 


Bread  Spotted  Horse  =  Reuben's  mother 


Reuben 

Old-dog  is  elder  brother  to  both  Reuben's  mother,  his  sister's  daughter,  and  to 
Reuben,  his  sister's  daughter's  son;  he  is  their  aku'pe.  Old-dog,  at  the  time  of  my 
visit,  was  about  eighty,  Reuben  a  little  over  twenty  years  of  age. 

Mrs.  Old-dog's  daughter  would  call  her  mother's  mother's  brother  basd'  are. 
Though  this  is  evidently  the  approved  method  of  designating  the  maternal  uncle  and 
great-uncle,  in  accordance  with  Hidatsa  usage,  there  is  some  tendency  for  the  gener 
ation  factor  to  assert  itself,  so  that  in  the  absence  of  a  specific  avuncular  term  some 
Crow  of  both  sexes,  call  the  mother's  brother  "father,"  while  the  great-uncle  is 
sometimes  called  "grandfather."  Gray-bull  connected  this  less  usual  mode  of 
designation  with  the  custom  of  adopting  and  bringing  up  a  sister's  child.  In  such  a 
case,  he  said,  the  child  would  call  the  mother's  brother  with  whom  it  lived  "father," 
while  its  own  mother  would  be  called  "sister"  and  its  own  father  "brother."  This  is 
a  point  on  which  I  should  like  to  obtain  corroborative  data. 

Plenty-hawk  calls  his  stepson  bard'x,  "Crazy-one." 

First  Ascending  Generation,  ak'e,  ak'se.  Parent,  used  only  non- 
vocatively,  I  think. 

axe'  (voc.,  m.  sp.).  Father,  father's  brother,  father's  mother's  brother, 
father's  sister's  son,  father's  clansman  regardless  of  age,  [mother's  sister's 
husband],  [father's  sister's  husband]. 

mirupxe  (non-voc.,  m.  sp.).  Coextensive  with  above.  Though  this 
word  is  never  used  in  address,  a  derivative  mirupxe  k-aVa,  which  etymo- 
logically  means"  little  (dear)  father"  may  be  so  employed.  However,  it  is 
not  properly  a  term  of  kinship  at  all,  but  denotes  either  a  specific  relation- 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  63 

ship  between  two  men  which  will  be  described  presently,  or  secondarily 
simply  intimacy  or  friendship.  Sometimes  a  good-looking  young  man 
would  temporarily  surrender  his  sweetheart  or  wife  to  one  of  his  friends. 
In  such  a  case  the  two  men  called  each  other  mirupxek-frte.  Sometimes 
the  young  man  desired  to  get  some  medicine  from  an  old  man  and  would 
similarly  surrender  his  marital  rights. 

Gray-bull  himself  secured  some  war  medicine  from  an  old  man,  for  which  he 
first  yielded  possession  of  his  mistress  and  later  of  his  wife.  The  medicine  was  used 
for  stealing  horses  from  the  enemy.  This  old  man  was  the  informant's  mother's 
brother,  but  thereafter  the  reciprocal  term  mini  pxek-ate  was  used  by  both.  Simply 
as  a  joke  this  term  is  applied  by  Bull-chief  to  Gray-bull,  a  fellow-clansman.  In  the 
historical  tale  of  Spotted-rabbit,  the  hero  after  becoming  a  Crazy-dog-vvishing-to-die 
(see  p.  83)  has  a  love  affair  with  the  wife  of  Two-faces,  who  thenceforth  regards  him 
as  iru'pxek-a^te.  In  another  story  two  men  who  have  stolen  each  other's  wives 
in  reconciliation  establish  the  same  mutual  relationship.' 

ma'sa'ke  (non-voc.).  My  father's  clansman.  The  corresponding  voca 
tive  form  in  a  was  used  only  in  praying  to  the  Sun. 

masa'ka,  masa'ke  (voc.  and  non-voc.,  w.  sp.).  Coextensive  with  axe' 
and  mirupxe  in  female  parlance. 

i'g-a  (voc.,  m.  sp.,  w.  sp.).  Mother,  mother's  sister,  mother's  clan  sister 
of  her  own  generation,  [father's  brother's  wife],  father's  sister,  [husband's 
mother]. 

masa  "ke  (non-voc.).     Coextensive  with  i'g-d. 

basbax  xid  (non-voc.).  Father's  sister,  father's  sister's  daughter,  father's 
sister's  daughter's  daughter,  and  all  female  descendants  through  females 
ad  infinitum.  This  term  corresponds  to  ma'sa'ke  with  the  difference  that 
it  designates  the  father's  female  clansfolk  while  the  latter  denotes  male 
members  of  his  clan.  Etymologically,  I  feel  certain  that  this  word  goes 
back  to  the  Hidatsa  stem  xid,  "old";  ba  being  a  nominal  prefix.  The  term 
thus  literally  means  "my  old  one."  This,  of  course,  suggests  a  secondary 
extension  of  meaning  from  the  primary  one  of  father's  sister. 

The  use  of  terms  may  again  be  abundantly  illustrated  by  text  material. 

In  a  song  sung  in  derision  of  the  Lumpwood  society,1  these  words  occur: 
dak  ake'retba'  wik • ,  "Their  children  parentless  I'll  make."  A  tradition 
begins  with  the  statement:  isa'k'cirdk  bak'e'-ivisak',  "A  young  man  had 
parents."  In  regard  to  the  same  character  the  phrase  b  av  k'saf  wi  ce  c  is 
also  applied,  meaning  "the  one  who  had  parents." 

The  distinction  of  speaker's  sex  in  addressing  the  father  appears  very 
clearly.  When  one  of  the  twin  heroes  speaks  to  his  father,  he  says,  ore', 


Lowie,   (d),  170. 


64  Anthropological  Papers  American  Mmeum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

dehamaku,  "Father,  your  food  give  me  some,"  but  when  Whirlwind- 
woman  is  admonished  by  an  old  man,  she  answers,  did,  wasa'ka',  bitsiwa' 
waku',  "  Come,  father,  tell  me  for  my  sake."  The  equally  rigid  differentia 
tion  in  non-vocative  use  was  forcibly  brought  home  to  me  when  I  once 
asked  a  half-breed  girl  where  her  father  was:  dlf  rupxe  co?  This  produced 
great  merriment,  the  only  possible  form  in  speaking  to  a  wroman  being 
disa'  ke.  For  instance,  after  Coyote's  supposed  decease  his  wife  says  to 
their  daughter,  disd'ake  ariri'dc  did  wcfwu,  "  Your  father,  what  he  said  let  us 
do."  In  the  myths  it  is  common  to  refer  to  a  person's  parents  specifically 
instead  of  using  the  generic  parent  term  discussed  above.  For  example, 
masa'kuu-rdk  mirupxu^-rdk  am-bare '-tsiwa  +  u,  "Our  mothers  and  our 
fathers  what  they  have  told  us."  Here  the  speakers  are  male.  When 
the  Buffalo-woman's  parents  are  referred  to,  however,  the  phrase  is  isa'kardk 
im'k-ardk,  "her  father  and  her  mother."  That  is  to  say,  the  stem  for 
"mother"  remains  the  same,  that  for  "father"  is  fundamentally  distinct. 

The  difference  between  vocative  and  non-vocative  stems  for  the  parent 
terms  is  readily  illustrated.  In  the  Old-Woman's  Grandson  myth,  the  boy 
hero  asks  his  mother  to  dig  wild  turnips  which  they  shall  eat:  i'g-a',  ihe'm 
bcikpd'k'  bu'cbok.  The  story  continues:  isa'ke',  di' rupxe  bare'  apifttseruk, 
hf'tseruk,  "His  mother,  'Your  father  us  to  dig  forbade'  she  said."  In 
another  story  a  boy  identifying  his  father  says,  miriipxe  k*ok*,  "My  father, 
it  is  he." 

A  prayer  to  the  Sun  opens  with  the  following  allocution:  kahe,  ma'sa'ka, 
kandisa/ace  diawa'hik-,  "Well,  father's  clansman,  now  your  blanket  I 
have  just  made."  In  a  story  dealing  with  the  origin  of  the  sweatlodge,  a 
character  is  thus  admonished:  dlik-uctci^-rdk,  da'asa*kem  ba'aku,  "When 
you  go  out,  (to)  your  father's  clansman  give  something." 

According  to  Gray-bull,  it  was  only  the  husband  of  an  own  or  at  least 
closely  related  "paternal  aunt"  that  was  called  axe'. 

Grasshopper's  daughter  addresses  her  paternal  uncles  masd'k  'a  and  her  father's 
sister  i  'g~a'. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  relationship  through  the  father's  clan  may  be 
superseded  as  a  result  of  marriage.  Thus,  if  a  birik-o'oce  married  Gray-bull's 
daughter,  Gray-bull  would  no  longer  call  him  "father"  but  consider  him  his  son- 
in-law;  while  by  marrying  Gray-bull's  sister,  he  would  become  his  brother-in-law. 

Second  Ascending  Generation,  axe'-isa'ke  (voc.,  m.  sp.).  Father's 
father,  father's  father's  brother,  mother's  father,  mother's  father's  brother, 
grandmother's  husband,  mother's  mother's  brother  (optional). 

mirupx-isa'ke  (non-voc.,  m.  sp.).     Coextensive  with  the  above. 

masa'k-isa'ka  (voc.,  w.  sp.).     Coextensive  with  above. 


1917.]  Lmvie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  65 

masa'k-isa'ke  (non-voc.,  w.  sp.).     Coextensive  with  above. 

masa  'ka/are  (voc.  and  non-voc.,  m.  sp.,  w.  sp.).  My  grandmother, 
grandmother's  sister,  mother's  paternal  aunt,  father's  paternal  aunt, 
grandfather's  wife. 

The  etymology  of  all  these  terms  is  transparent,  isa"'ke,  of  the  same 
stem  with  ise,  isa,  "old,"  "big,"  is  the  essential  element  of  the  customary 
word  for  "old  man,"  isa'  'kaka^te;  cf.  Isa'^ka-wudte,  Old-Man-Coyote. 
In  other  words,  the  grandfather  terms  are  composed  of  the  "father"  term 
plus  the  stem  for  "old  man."  masalka'are  is  similarly  compounded  by  con 
traction  of  the  non-vocative  term  for  "mother"  with  the  customary  word 
for  "old  woman,"  ka'*rc. 

In  the  Old-Woman's  —  Grandchild  cycle  the  hero's  adoptive  grand 
mother  thus  announces  that  he  has  killed  her  husband,  e'k  dl'rupx-isa^ka 
k'ok\  "  That  one  your  grandfather  was  identical  with."  In  telling  the  old 
woman  of  his  departure,  the  hero  says,  masa*kaare,  ba\vac  bare'wik", 
"  Grandmother,  I  am  going  to  hunt."  When  he  gets  back  to  her,  the  same 
stem  is  used  non-vocatively :  isa'kci^re  hi'dk*,  "His  grandmother  he 
reached." 

In  prayer  the  Moon  is  said  to  have  been  addressed  as  masa'karare. 

Sunrise  is  regarded  as  Plenty-hawk's  grandson,  because  the  latter  married  Sun 
rise's  grandmother. 

Gray-bull's  granddaughter  calls  both  Gray-bull,  who  is  her  father's  father,  and 
her  mother's  mother's  brother  masd'k-isa  'ke.  She  likewise  calls  Horn,  her  mother's 
mother's  sister's  husband  "grandfather,"  and  his  wife  "grandmother." 

Descending  Generations.  ba'ka'te  (non-voc.).  My  child.  Composed 
of  nominal  prefix  and  diminutive  suffix. 

dak,  rak,  nak  (usually  non-voc.).  Child,  both  with  and  without  kin 
ship  significance. 

da/k-batsev  (non-voc.).     Son,  literally  "child-man." 

da'k-brd  (usually  non-voc.).     Daughter,  "child-woman." 

iro' oce  (voc.).  Son  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  brother's  son  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.); 
mother's  brother's  son  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  mother's  mother's  brother's  son 
(m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  sister's  son  (w.  sp.),  grandson  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.). 

xu/utse  (voc.).  Daughter  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  brother's  daughter  (m.  sp., 
w.  sp.),  mother's  brother's  daughter  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  sister's  daughter  (w. 
sp.),  granddaughter  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.),  younger  sister  (w.  sp.),  [younger  sister- 
in-law,  (w.  sp.)]. 

macbapite  (non-voc.).     Grandchild  (m.  sp.,  w.  sp.). 

Perhaps  the  most  interesting  point  in  regard  to  these  terms  is  the  limita 
tion  of  the  "grandchild"  term  to  non-vocative  use.  Phonetically  it  corre- 


66  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

spends  perfectly  to  the  Hidatsa  stem,  which,  however,  is  used  both  in  direct 
address  and  otherwise.  The  Crow  connotation  is  clearly  exemplified  both 
in  daily  life  and  in  mythology.  Thus,  Young-crane  calls  her  daughter's 
daughter  xu'utse;  in  the  Old-Woman's  Grandchild  myth  the  hero's  name  is 
Kd'ricb&pi'ludc  ("Old  woman  her  grandchild,"  plural  form),  but  she 
addresses  him  as  iro'°cc,  or  with  added  diminutive  iro'°ck-(Tta,  never  as 
ma'cbapite.  She  does,  however,  apply  to  him,  both  vocatively  and  non- 
vocatively,  the  generic  "child"  term.  For  example,  we  find:  wara'k* 
bd>  ward'xkdVec,  "my  grandchild  is  a  crazy  one;"  ik-a,  bard'  kfTta,  "Look, 
my  little  (grand)  child."  Correspondingly,  the  term  is  used  in  the  third 
person:  hine  k-d'arec  nd'k'batse  tsiri"tscruk,  "This  old  woman  her  (grand)- 
son  feared,  it  is  said." 

Some  of  the  other  words  of  this  series  are  not  so  rigidly  defined  as  to 
vocative  or  non-vocative  use,  though  the  above  data  give  the  preferential 
or  at  all  events  more  common  meaning.  For  example,  Old-Man-Coyote's 
wife  says,  to  a  man  hine  xuutsk  •  d'te  dxpdk,  "  This  little  daughter  marry  " 
(imperative).  On  the  other  hand,  an  old  mouse  thus  addresses  Whirlwind- 
woman:  barid  di'a,  dd'k'bl^d,  "My  words  execute,  daughter,"  where  it  is 
also  noteworthy  that  the  pronominal  prefix  is  lacking. 

Illustrations  of  the  use  of  terms  taken  from  mythological  material  follow- : 

bac-bakd'te  d'tsipd'ri,  My  children  may  they  grow  up.  bard'k*  saso, 
"My  child  soon  bring  (imperative),  dard'k'e  cik-d' k\T  t'-ddk,  "Your 
child  if  it  should  be  a  boy."  dd'k'batse'  i'  rd  pu'  rdk,  "  His  sons  there  are  two 
of  them."  dara'  k'  bi"  a  daro're  ardxpa?  "Your  daughter  you  came  and 
married?"  dd'k'bl'dc  xatsi'dk,  "Her  daughter  (obj.)  she  shook."  darfi'k'e 
dxpdk  d'takdt  awd'tsia,  "Your  child  (a  grown-up  daughter)  with  her  close 
sit"  (imperative),  axe',  hammaku.  iro'°cc,  co'ritsim  diwardkd?  "Father, 
some  give  me.  Son,  when  (did)  you  (become)  my  child?" 

Yellow-brow  calls  Grasshopper's  daughter,  i.  e.,  his  wife's  brother's 
daughter  xu'utse.  Young-crane  calls  her  daughter's  daughter  by  the  same 
term. 

A  suspicion  sometimes  arises  whether  what  from  our  point  of  view  seems  a 
grotesque  misapplication  of  terms  of  kinship  is  not  merely  a  theoretical  exercise  on 
the  natives'  part.  But  both  among  the  Hidatsa  and  the  Crow  the  apparently  absurd 
connotations  feature  in  everyday  conversation.  Reuben  assured  me  that  Bread 
(see  diagram,  p.  62)  addressed  him,  i.  e.,  his  father's  sister's  daughter's  son,  as  axt 
not  by  way  of  a  joke  but  as  the  normal  mode  of  allocution.  An  even  more  con 
vincing  case  came  directly  under  my  observation.  A  four-year  old  boy,  Sunrise, 
actually  called  a  two-year  old  girl,  Good-skunk,  his  daughter.  In  reality,  she  is  his 
mother's  brother's  daughter.  I  asked  Sunrise,  "dara  k'bl'  a  co?"  "Your  daughter 
where  (is  she)?"  He  at  once  replied  by  puckering  up  his  lips  and  protruding  them 
towards  Good-skunk.  In  other  words,  these  to  us  strange  applications  are  imparted 
to  children,  with  others  that  seem  normal  to  us,  at  a  very  early  age. 


1917.]    •         Lowe,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  67 

According  to  Young-crane,  a  woman  would  refer  to  her  brother's  child  as  macbtf- 
pi'te.  This  may  be  merely  a  retroactive  effect  of  the  freedom  with  which  the  Crow 
merge  distinct  generations,  for  the  husband  of  the  father's  sister  wras  not  classed 
with  the  grandfather  but  with  the  father.  Thus,  Young-crane  had  an  elder  brother's 
daughter,  whom  she  referred  to  as  her  grandchild,  but  who  addressed  Hunts-the- 
enemy,  my  informant's  husband,  as  "father."  A  plausible  reason  for  the  classifica 
tion  of  the  brother's  child  with  the  grandchild  lies  in  the  classification  of  the  mother's 
brother's  child  with  the  child:  if  the  father's  sister's  son  regards  his  cross-cousin  as 
his  son  or  daughter,  it  is  not  unnatural  for  the  father's  sister  to  regard  this  nephew 
or  niece  as  her  grandchild.  My  impression  is  that  Crow  usage,  here  as  in  some  other 
respects,  is  not  rigidly  fixed, —  certainly  less  so  than  among  the  Hidatsa. 

Morgan's  Crow  schedules  have  a  relatively  high  degree  of  correctness,  most  if 
not  all  of  his  terms  being  readily  equated  with  those  obtained  by  more  phonetic 
methods  of  transcription  and  the  meanings  being  also  given  with  a  fair  measure  of 
accuracy.  Nevertheless,  there  are  not  a  few  errors  due  to  his  unfamiliarity  with  the 
language  and  sometimes  to  his  failure  to  note  the  distinction  betw.een  vocative  and 
non- vocative  use. 

As  generic  terms  for  "my  brothers"  and  "my  sisters"  Morgan  gives  the  equiva 
lents  of  bdsa'pe  and  baku'prri?d,  respectively.  The  former  expression  has  been  found 
to  extend  far  beyond  the  narrow  family  circle  (p.  59),  the  latter  seems  to  me  a  per 
fectly  legitimate  compound  of  baku'pe  and  ux?d  ("Geschivister"  and  "woman")  but 
is  hardly  the  usual  generic  expression  for  "sisters,"  for  which  I  think  bacbi'd  would  be 
more  commonly  used  (but  see  p.  60).  In  defining  the  equivalents  of  Wik-a  and 
basa'  are,  Morgan  correctly  notes  the  extension  of  these  terms  to  elder  parallel  cousins, 
but  wrongly  makes  the  latter  word  stand  for  maternal  uncle  in  male  as  well  as  in 
female  speech.  In  the  former  case  bl'  ik-a  is  naturally  used  since  basa'  are  is  only 
employed  by  women,  "bd-cha-ka"  for  " father's  brother's  daughter's  son"  is  ob 
viously  only  a  misprint  for  bd-chu'-ka,  which  is  correctly  rendered  to  cover  the  younger 
brother  and  younger  parallel  male  cousin  in  the  speech  of  both  sexes;  and  the  sister's 
son  and  the  mother's  sister's  daughter's  son  in  male  parlance.  The  father's  brother's 
daughter  being  a  "sister"  according  to  the  Crow  system,  her  son  is  naturally  in  the 
class  of  the  sister's  son.  Morgan  limits  basa  'ka'ata  to  the  man's  elder  sister  and 
parallel  female  cousin,  while  according  to  my  data  it  is  used  by  both  sexes.  The 
term  he  gives  for  a  female's  elder  sister  bus-we'-na  I  can  identify  with  nothing  but 
basbi'd,  the  generic  sister  term.  It  may  be  noted  that  its  phonetic  equivalent  in 
Hidatsa  is  limited  to  male  usage,  baso'  ka,  being  a  female  term,  cannot  be  applied 
by  a  man  to  his  sister's  daughter,  the  corresponding  basa'tsl'  ita  being  the  only  per 
missible  one.  Morgan  correctly  defines  this  word  to  include  a  man's  younger  sister 
and  female  parallel  cousins;  curiously  enough,  he  omits  the  meaning  "sister's 
daughter,"  for  his  correctly  given  additional  definitions  "father's  brother's  daughter's 
daughter"  and  "mother's  sister's  daughter's  daughter "  are  intelligible  only  through 
the  extension  of  the  term  to  the  sister's  daughter. 

In  the  ascending  generation  Morgan  gives  only  the  vocative  father  term,  thus 
obscuring  the  derivation  of  his  (non- vocative)  grandfather  term.  He  errs  in  not 
restricting  axe'  to  male  speech  and  thus  even  comes  to  extend  it  to  the  husband's 
father.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  worth  noting  that  he  correctly  makes  it  cover  the 
relationship  of  father's  sister's  husband,  i'g-a'  is  rightly  defined,  the  extension  to 
father's  sister's  son's  wife  following  logically  from  the  status  of  the  cross-cousin. 
The  only  criticism  to  be  made  under  this  head  is  Morgan's  failure  to  note  that  there 


68  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

is  a  non- vocative  term  generally  corresponding  to  i'g-a'  but  not  embracing  the  pater 
nal  aunt  and  her  female  descendants  through  females.  Morgan  gives  e-sd-cheka  for 
stepfather;  I  never  found  the  equivalent  used  except  for  the  stepson.  For  the 
grandfather  and  all  the  other  male  relatives  of  his  and  higher  generations  Morgan 
has  one  word,  miru'px-isa^'ke.  This  we  have  seen  to  be  only  the  non- vocative  form 
of  male  parlance.  Further,  the  extension  to  the  mother's  mother's  brother  is  merely 
optional,  and  I  suspect  the  same  for  the  mother's  mother's  mother's  brother,  masa'- 
ka'  are  is  correctly  defined. 

In  the  first  descending  generation  Morgan  again  fails  to  note  the  distinction 
between  direct  address  and  non-vocative  usage.  For  the  daughter  he  gives  only  an 
expression  predominantly  non- vocative,  da'kbl^d.  For  "son"  the  form  bot-sa'-sa  is 
listed,  the  additional  meanings  being  brother's  son  and  mother's  sister's  son's  son 
for  both  sexes,  and  sister's  son  and  mother's  sister's  daughter's  son  for  female  speech. 
What  Morgan  himself  evidently  felt  to  be  a  word  of  the  same  stem,  botso'-ka,  is 
defined  father's  brother's  son's  son  and  mother's  brother's  son  for  both  sexes,  and 
father's  brother's  daughter's  son  for  women.  There  is  no  warrant  for  this  differentia 
tion.  Morgan  seems  to  have  got  mutilated  forms  of  the  non-vocative  da'kbatse\ 
which  would  cover  all  his  meanings. 

In  the  second  descending  generation  Morgan  fails  to  note  that  macba^pi'te  is 
restricted  to  non-vocative  use.  The  meaning  "sister's  grandson  (m.  sp.)"  requires 
explanation.  The  sister's  daughter's  son  would  logically  be  a  sister's  son,  i.  e.,  a 
younger  brother,  correlatively  with  the  designation  of  the  mother's  mother's  brother 
as  elder  brother.  In  practice,  however,  we  have  found  this  use  to  be  optional,  the 
grandfather  term  being  sometimes  substituted,  and  to  correspond  with  this  we  may 
have  the  sister's  daughter's  son  classed  with  the  grandson.  Eut  this  reasoning  does 
not  apply  to  the  sister's  son's  son,  for  the  sister's  son  is  a  younger  brother,  whence 
his  son  becomes  a  brother's  son,  i.  e.,  a  son,  not  a  grandson.  In  agreement  with  this 
we  have  the  classification  of  the  father's  mother's  brother  with  the  father.  Morgan 
is  more  seriously  at  fault  in  his  interpretation  of  the  word  basb&xi'd  as  sister's  grand 
daughter,  (m.  sp.),  and  father's  sister's  son's  son,  father's  sister's  son's  daughter, 
father's  sister's  daughter's  son  in  the  speech  of  both  sexes.  Indeed,  the  only  correct 
meaning  furnished  by  Morgan  is  "father's  sister's  daughter's  daughter."  His 
misunderstanding  is  in  part  due  to  his  ignoring  the  distinction  between  the  vocative 
and  non-vocative  for  paternal  aunt,  basba''  xi'd  simply  denotes,  in  non-vocative 
use,  the  father's  sister  and  all  her  female  descendants  through  females.  It  never 
designates  a  male  relative;  the  son  of  a  father's  sister's  son  is  a  father's  son,  i.  e.,  a 
brother,  while  the  son  of  a  father's  sister's  daughter  is  a  father's  sister's  son,  i.  e.,  a 
father.  The  father's  sister's  son's  daughter,  being  a  father's  daughter,  is  classed 
with  the  sister.  lintlly,  basb&xi'd  cannot  be  applied  to  the  sister's  daughter's 
daughter,  who  is  a  sister  (cf.  diagram,  p.  62);  but  neither  can  it  be  extended  to  a 
man's  sister's  son's  daughter,  who  is  classed  with  the  daughter  of  a  brother,  hence 
with  the  daughter. 

TERMS    OF   AFFINITY. 

Speaker's  Generation,  axpe  (non-voc.)-  Spouse.  The  stem  means  also 
"companion"  "to  marry,"  and  "in  the  company  of."  For  example,  in  a 
tale  a  man  who  kills  an  enemy  with  his  mother's  help  is  dubbed  "  Isa'k- 
axpa-rape'c,"  "His  mother-with-he-kills." 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  69 

tsire  (non-voc.).  Husband.  This  is  the  only  specific  term  for  this 
relationship,  but  like  its  phonetic  equivalent  among  the  Hidatsa  it  is  re 
garded  as  something  of  a  honorific  designation.  That  is  to  say,  its  use 
suggests  the  permanence  of  the  union;  whether  the  Hidatsa  idea  is  involved 
that  the  woman  must  not  have  been  previously  married,  I  am  unable  to 
state  definitely. 

u'd  (non-voc.).     Wife.     This  is  the  specific  term  for  this  relationship. 

The  two  preceding  words  are  used  with  possessive  or  privative  particles 
to  denote  the  fact  or  the  contrary  of  marriage.  Thus,  a  man  is  asked 
du'a-wici,  "  Are  you  married?  "  (literally,  your  wife  is  there  one?)  or  dua- 
wic-bice,  "Have  you  ever  been  married?"  or  an-dua-wic-base,  dicba're 
sa'wef  "When  you  were  married  the  first  time,  how  old  were  you?"  Of  a 
woman  it  is  said:  tsi'mbicik- ,  "She  is  married,"  (literally,  "her  husband  there 
is  one,"  the  final  syllable  of  tsire  being  contracted  and  assimilated  to  follow 
ing  &).  In  a  song  a  woman  is  represented  as  saying,  bateimbicik-,  "I  am 
married"  and  is  told  datsi'netde'Vk,  "You  are  as  though  without  a  husband" 
(net,  privative). 

bu'  d  ka  (voc.,  m.  sp.).  My  brother's  wife,  mother's  brother's  wife. 
This  is  clearly  a  derivative  from  the  foregoing;  the  non- vocative  is  formed 
in  the  usual  way  (e). 

bu'd  —  wa  -|-  ise  (m.  sp.).  My  wife's  elder  sister,  wa  is  the  nominal 
prefix,  ise  means  "old,  big." 

bu'd-karic'ta  (m.  sp.).  My  wife's  younger  sister;  my  young  wife  in  a 
polygamous  household. 

bactsite  (w.  sp.).     My  husband's  brother. 

Nothing  is  more  complicated  than  the  Crow  mode  of  designating  these 
affinities,  for  there  seems  to  be  considerable  latitude.  Neither  spouse 
ordinarily  addresses  the  other  by  name,  but  this  was  sometimes  used, 
probably  only  in  the  case  of  long-continued  union.  Gray-bull  said  that  a 
good  woman  would  call  her  husband  by  name,  meaning  she  would  have  to 
be  one  whom  her  husband  would  not  have  cause  to  abandon  for  infidelity. 
Instead  of  the  names,  demonstrative  or  inter jectional  expressions  are 
employed  in  direct  address,  he'  ha  is  used  by  either  sex  in  calling  a  spouse. 
The  women  also  use  hira'  and  more  particularly  baru'aritse,  which  latter 
word  I  cannot  satisfactorily  analyze.  A  wife's  sister  is  likewise  addressed 
he'  ha,  and  in  calling  her  sister's  husband  she  employs  the  identical  word  or 
him.  She  may  also  call  her  brother-in-law  by  name:  "  da'sud  /c'o  ra'sasuk*," 
"Name  that  they  call  him."  A  woman  similarly  may  call  her  husband's 
brother  by  name  and  he  may  use  hers  instead  of  budka,  but  there  are  evi 
dently  optional  modes  of  address:  if  he  is  older,  she  calls  him  mma'  re;  if 
younger,  either  batsu'ka  or  even  iro'  oce. 

The  term  he' ha,  as  applied  to  a  wife's  sister,  obviously  refers  to  potential 


70  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

connubium  for  she  is  no  longer  so  addressed  when  married  to  another  man, 
her  name  being  then  used  instead.  She  may  also  be  called  "  So-and-so's 
wife." 

In  non-vocative  first-person  usage  non-specific  expressions  often  take  the 
place  of  batsire  and  bua.  Thus,  we  may  have  the  demonstratives,  l'  wd  'k, 
i'mbe,  i'rd*k,  or  combinations  of  demonstratives  with  generic  expressions. 

I  was  seated  by  Mrs.  Plenty-hawk,  whose  husband  had  been  telling  me  myths, 
when  a  visitor  arrived  and  knowing  what  my  business  was  inquired  who  was  telling 
me  stories.  The  hostess  answered  i'mbe,  "That  one,"  her  husband  being  at  the 
moment  some  distance  away  and  in  motion.  U'ciec's  wife  always  referred  to  her 
husband  as  e"k  isa/'ke,  "that  old  man";  other  women  would  use  batse'  "man" 
in  place  of  isa"ke  and  might  substitute  I  rd  'k  for  e"k.  A  man  often  referred  to  his 
wife  as  e''k'  (or  ir  <9  'k)  bl'd  "that  woman."  Corresponding  expressions  are  in  vogue 
for  other  relatives.  Thus,  a  woman  speaks  of  her  husband's  brother  as  e"k  badsite', 
"that  my  brother-in-law"  and  of  her  sister's  husband  as  e''k  tsire',  "that  one's  hus 
band,"  and  a  man  may  refer  to  his  wife's  younger  sister  as  e"k  isd'  °ke,  "that  one's 
younger  sister." 

A  woman  sometimes  referred  to  her  husband  teknonymously,  saying, 
"the  boy's  father." 

ba'acr  (voc.,  m.  sp.).  My  wife's  brother,  wife's  mother's  brother, 
sister's  husband,  sister's  daughter's  husband. 

bara/ace  (non-voc.,  m.  sp.).     Coextensive  with  the  foregoing. 

bakua  (non-voc.,  w.  sp.).     My  husband's  sister. 

basbl'akaricta  (non-voc.,  w.  sp.).  My  brother's  wife,  literally  "my 
young  woman"  (see  p.  58). 

Vocatively,  the  sisters-in-law  may  address  each  other  by  name;  or  the 
elder  may  call  the  younger  xu'  utse,  being  in  turn  called  maku  kd^ta,  "  elder 
sister"  (see  p.  60).  Probably  the  other  terms  for  sister  are  also  permissi 
ble.1  According  to  one  informant,  sisters-in-law  of  about  the  same  age 
called  each  other  hl'ra,  "female  comrade." 

According  to  one  statement,  the  wife's  sister's  husband  is  called  elder  or 
younger  brother  depending  on  seniority;  according  to  another,  he  is  not 
considered  a  relative  but  is  called  bard'x  (cf.  p.  60). 

batc-iri'kuo  is  the  expression  used  to  designate  the  relationship  between 
co-wives,  the  first  syllable  being  the  reciprocal  prefix,  (cf.  p.  35). 

The  use  of  the  above-mentioned  terms  of  affinity  is  in  some  measure 
illustrated  in  the  texts  secured.  In  the  myth  of  Lodge-boy  and  Thrown- 
away,  the  witch  who  afterwards  kills  the  heroes'  mother  addresses  her  as 
follows:  hl'ra,  datslre  ba'tsik'ut*,  co'ot-da^e,  "Female  comrade,  your  husband 

i  See  Lowie,  (c),  212. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  71 

when  he  comes  home  with  his  pack,  what  do  you  do?"  In  another  tale 
when  Mouse  transforms  Old-Man-Coyote  into  a  mouse,  Whirlwind-woman 
fails  to  recognize  him :  tsire-c  ard'xta-td're  .'tseruk,  "  Her  husband  she  truly 
did  not  know,  it  is  said."  In  the  Old-Woman's  —  Grandchild  myth,  when 
the  hero  has  killed  his  adoptive  grandmother's  husband,  she  informs  him 
of  his  identity:  e'  'k-  dl'rupx'-dsa^ka  k*ok\  bl  watsiraf -k\  "That  your 
grandfather  was,  I  my  husband  he  was."  When  a  dwarf  asks  a  young 
man  whether  he  is  married,  the  reply  is  bu  a  k'ar-e'  risak\  "My  wife  now 
is  pregnant."  In  a  society's  song  ridiculing  the  rival  organization  it  is 
said:  a' re-tatse' -we  ud  kurutsl'm,  dud  hu'kaive,  "Straight-arm  his  wife  took 
back,  your  wife  let  her  come."  A  tyrant  who  has  cruelly  treated  the  hero 
of  a"  tale  attempts  to  placate  him  by  saying:  bu  akari^clem  Usik-d'cec  axpdk, 
"  My  young  good-looking  wife  (in  a  polygamous  household)  marry"  (imper.). 
In  another  story  a  woman  is. living  with  her  husband,  her  husband's  brother, 
and  his  sister.  This  fact  is  expressed  as  follows:  bl'drdk  isire'  isl  ictsit*- 
bic-ddk  akua-kdt'-bic-ddk  ku*  kord'tseruk,  "A  woman,  her  husband,  also  her 
husband's  brother  there  was  one,  her  husband's  little  sister  there  was  one, 
also  she  was  there."  When  a  young  man  has  had  his  will  of  a  buffalo-cow, 
he  addresses  her  he' ha,  "WTife!"  The  same  word  is  used  by  a  young  man 
who  has  eloped  with  the  wife  of  another.  In  the  story  of  Coyote  and  his 
Daughter,  the  little  boy  announces  his  discovery  of  Coyote's  identity 
with  the  words:  hine'  ward' ace  mirupxe  k'ok*,  "This  my  brother-in-law 
my  father  is  identical  with."  With  reference  to  the  boy's  scrutinizing 
Coyote's  face  it  is  said:  ird'  acecl'se  i' k-a-kd^ci-'tseruk,  "His  brother-in- 
law's  face  he  looked  at  very  much,  they  say."  The  mother  warns  the  boy: 
ird'  oce,  dird'  ace  I'se  dirutsiri,  "  Son,  your  brother-in-law's  face  you  might 
touch." 

Spotted-horse  (see  diagram  p.  62)  was  Old-dog's  brother-in-law,  being  his 
sister's  daughter's  husband. 

Other  Generations.  The  most  important  fact  relating  to  other  relatives 
by  marriage  is  the  reciprocal  rule  of  avoidance  obtaining  between  a  man 
and  certain  of  his  wife's  relatives.  There  is  a  generic  expression  covering 
all  relatives  who  are  shunned, —  uct'  (plural,  usu'a) ;  with  the  first  person 
the  word  becomes  buce'.  Of  course,  vocative  forms  are  out  of  the  question 
for  these  tabooed  affinities.  U'uciec,  from  a  man's  point  of  view,  sum 
marized  the  facts  as  follows:  bu'a  isa'ke  buruci'  tuk*;  bu'  a  icbatse'  u'd 
burucituk* ;  bu'a  isd'ke  bururituk1;  bard'kbVd  tsire  burucituk\  That  is, 
"Our  wife's  mother  we  avoid  (i.  e.,  neither  look  at  her  nor  speak  to  her); 
our  wife's  brother's  wife  we  avoid;  our  wife's  father  we  avoid ;  our  daughter's 
husband  we  avoid."  These  terms  should  be  understood  in  the  native, 


72  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

classificatory  sense;  yet  apparently  without  including  the  more  remote 
relatives  of  the  wife;  and  the  wife's  grandmothers,  on  both  sides  should 
have  been  added,  as  indeed  the  informant  remarked  independently  of  his 
formal  enumeration.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Crow  differ  from  the  Hidatsa 
in  not  including  with  the  ucd  the  wife's  isbd^xi'd  (paternal  aunts,  etc.), 
who  are  not  avoided  and  are  classed  with  the  mother.  In  polygamous 
marriage  with  unrelated  wives,  the  taboo  extended  to  the  relations  of  all 
the  wives.  The  rule  of  avoidance  embraced  the  son-in-law's  own  brothers, 
as  well  as  the  son-in-law  himself,  but  apparently  did  not  affect  more  remote 
kinsmen. 

The  father-in-law  taboo  was  also  weaker  than  the  rule  for  mutual 
avoidance  between  wife's  mother  and  daughter's  husband;  nowadays  it 
seems  to  have  largely  disappeared  while  the  other  taboos  persist. 

One-star,  who  was  once  married  to  one  of  Arm-round-the-neck's  daughters,  is 
now  called  "son"  by  his  one-time  father-in-law  and  treated  accordingly,  and  One- 
star's  wife  is  considered  his  daughter.  One-star  speaks  to  his  former  son-in-law,  Leo 
Medicine-crow.  In  these  cases,  the  dissolution  of  the  marriage  bond  may  be  thought 
to  have  produced  this  effect.  But  this  does  not  apply  to  the  case  of  James  Carpenter, 
who  speaks  freely  to  Flat-head-woman,  his  wife's  father,  but  continues  to  shun  his 
wife's  mother,  her  grandmother,  and  her  brother's  wife. 

A  man  may  refer  to  his  parents-in-law  as  basx&ri'd  or  basba'xartd, 
"my  old  one"  or  "my  old  ones."  He  may  also  designate  them  as  "that 
woman's  father"  or  "that  woman's  mother." 

The  rule  of  avoidance  can  be  removed,  usually  after  the  wife's  death, 
by  the  presentation  of  a  substantial  gift,  and  in  this  step  either  the  son-in- 
law  or  the  parent-in-law  may  take  the  initiative.  In  such  cases  a  parent- 
child  relationship  is  assumed. 

Thus,  Gray-bull  gave  Yellow-brow  one*  or  two  horses  and  said,  bara'ke  ko  dl 
at'-di'd  wa?  wik- ,  "My  child  that  you,  too,  I  shall  make  you."  Since  then  he  spoke 
and  smoked  with  him  as  though  with  one  of  his  sons,  but  Gray-bull's  wife  was  not 
affected  by  the  arrangement.  A  wife's  death  and  divorce  certainly  affected  the 
taboo.  Young-crane,  after  the  death  of  her  daughter,  prepared  her  son-in-law 
through  his  father  for  what  was  coming,  then  gave  him  a  colt,  spoke  to  him,  and 
since  then  has  treated  him  as  a  son.  She  lives  with  him  and  takes  care  of  her  grand 
daughter.  Yet  sometimes  horses  are  presented  without  a  removal  of  the  taboo. 
Gray-bull  gave  one  horse  to  his  father-in-law  and  another  to  his  mother-in-law,  but 
only  spoke  to  the  former  thereafter.  It  is  also  strange  that  wrhile  Grasshopper  now 
freely  converses  with  Young-crane,  his  own  brothers,  White-hip  and  Cuts,  who  form 
erly  shared  the  taboo  with  him,  do  not  yet  talk  to  the  old  woman  without  restraint. 
While  they  no  longer  shun  her,  they  do  not  speak  with  her  any  more  than  is  necessary. 

Gray-bull  said  that  since  his  wife's  death  he  no  longer  shuns  all  her  brothers' 
wives.  "My  wife  was  the  reason  I  did  not  talk  to  them,  so  now  that  she  is  gone 
I  talk  to  them."  However,  this  principle  is  not  consistently  carried  out.  My 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  73 

informant  still  shuns  his  wife's  own  or  closely  related  brothers'  wives.  He  was  suc 
cessively  married  to  five  wives.  After  a  divorce  he  would  no  longer  avoid  his  former 
wife's  mother. 

There  is  no  taboo  between  a  woman  and  her  parents-in-law,  whom  she 
treats  as  her  own  parents.  She  calls  them  masd'ka,  "father"  or  bas-isd'  'he, 
"my  old  man,"  and  masa  'ke,  "mother,"  bac-k-d'  are,  "my  old  woman," 
or  I'rd  'k  k-d' arc,  "that  old  woman."  On  the  other  hand,  da'k'bVd, 
"daughter"  is  used,  certainly  by  the  mother-in-law,  and  probably  likewise 
by  the  father-in-law,  in  addressing  the  son's  wife. 

Morgan  gives  the  easily  recognized  equivalent  of  ml'rapatse  as  the  word  by  which 
two  fathers-in-law,  i.  e.,  the  fathers  of  spouses,  address  each  other.  This  is  the  usual 
word  for  "comrade,  friend."  The  same  author  gives  hd-nd  as  the  corresponding 
word  for  the  relationship  between  the  spouses'  mothers.  This  must  be  a  misprint 
for  hi'ra,  the  usual  word  for  "female  comrade."  It  may  very  well  be  that  such 
terms  were  used,  since  their  application  is  generic  and  would  simply  express  friend 
ship  or  courtesy.  The  only  relevant  data  I  collected  refer  to  the  relations  between 
parents-in-law  of  opposite  sex.  Gray-bull,  whose  son  had  married  Young-crane's 
daughter  (deceased),  lived  for  years  under  the  same  roof  with  the  old  woman.  They 
did  not  regard  each  other  as  relatives,  yet  treated  each  other  as  though  they  were. 
They  were  i'd-nakasu'a  (first  person  singular:  bi'd-nakase). 

Owing  to  the  extreme  difficulty  of  the  affinity  terms  used  by  the  Crow,  it  is  not 
surprising  to  find  Morgan's  schedules  inadequate  in  some  respects  and  misleading 
in  others.  It  was  natural  that  he  should  usually  have  obtained  the  specific  terms 
rather  than  the  non-specific  modes  of  address.  Sometimes  his  ignorance  of  the  lan 
guage  is  to  blame.  For  example,  the  daughter-in-law  (w.  sp.)  and  sister's  son's 
wife  (w.  sp.)  are  not  denoted  by  a  specific  term  when  called  bard'ke  (md-nd-ka). 
as  Morgan's  readers  might  conjecture,  but  by  the  generic  expression  for  "my  child." 
Similarly,  gd-na  in  his  boo'  sha-gd-na  is  simply  kd'are,  the  word  for  "old  woman" 
suffixed  to  bucc'.  Ignorance  of  the  avoidance  rule  prevents  him  from  explaining 
why  wife's  father,  son-in-law,  and  so  forth,  should  be  designated  by  this  common 
term.  He  also  fails  to  include  the  wife's  brother's  wife  in  this  category,  giving 
botze'-no-pdche  for  both  her  and  the  husband's  brother's  wife.  I  consider  this  in 
correct,  for  his  term  seems  to  be  the  equivalent  of  bats-l'rapatse,  which  means  "one 
another's  male  comrade."  Morgan  fails  to  note  that  bd'aci  is  simply  the  vocative  of 
bar  a' ace  and  translates  the  former  "wife's  brother,"  the  latter  "father's  brother's 
daughter's  husband,  mother's  sister's  daughter's  husband,  and  sister's  husband  (all 
m.  sp.).  For  "husband"  and  "wife"  he  gives  merely  the  non-vocative  terms,  being 
apparently  ignorant  of  the  impossibility  of  using  these  in  direct  address.  For 
bu'd  ka  the  classificatory  extensions  are  correctly  given,  for  since  the  sister's  son,  the 
father's  brother's  son,  the  mother's  brother,  and  the  mother's  sister's  son  are  all 
"brothers"  (m.  sp.),  it  follows  that  their  wives  must  be  designated  by  the  same  term 
as  an  own  brother's  wife.  On  the  other  hand,  Morgan  errs  in  defining  basbl'  akaricta 
(bos-me  a-kun-is-td) .  He  correctly  gives  "brother's  wife  (w.  sp.),"  from  which 
fundamental  meaning  follows,  logically  enough,  the  extension  to  father's  brother's 
son's  wife  and  mother's  sister's  son's  wife  (both  w.  sp.).  But  he  also  gives  "daughter- 
in-law  (m.  sp.),"  and  "brother's  son's  wife "  and  "mother's  brother's  son's  wife"  for 


74  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

both  sexes.  This  information  is  in  a  measure  inconsistent,  for  the  application  by 
both  sexes  to  the  two  last-named  affinities  would  follow  only  from  a  term  for  "daugh 
ter-in-law"  common  to  men  and  women,  while  Morgan  limits  basin'  akari^cta  to  male 
speech  in  this  sense.  The  essential  objection,  however,  is  that  I  find  no  warrant  for 
the  use  of  basbl'akari^cta  except  to  denote  a  woman's  brother's  wife.  It  is,  however, 
rash  to  dogmatize  on  the  designation  of  Crow  affinities;  and  I  hasten  to  point  out 
that  etymologically  the  extensions  given  by  Morgan  are  intelligible  since  the  term 
signifies  literally  only  "my  young  (but  mature)  kinswoman." 


KINSHIP  USAGES. 

'  A  few  additional  data  have  been  secured  on  this  topic. 

The  respect  paid  to  each  other  by  male  brothers-in-law  has  already  been 
emphasized.  According  to  one  informant,  it  is  mainly  the  wife's  brother 
that  gives  presents  of  horses,  guns,  etc.,  to  the  sister's  husband,  though 
the  latter  sometimes  makes  a  return  gift.  The  brother-in-law  relationship 
was  said  to  persist  after  the  divorce  of  the  connecting  relative.  On  the 
other  hand,  by  adoption  into  a  society  a  "brother-in-law"  might  be  trans 
formed  into  a  "son."  This  happened,  e.  g.,  when  Gray-bull  adopted  Lee 
Scolds-the-bear  into  the  Night  Dancers'  club.  There  is  no  objection  to 
telling  obscene  myths  in  the  presence  of  a  brother-in-law,  but  personal 
obscenity  must  be  avoided. 

Female  sisters-in-law  did  not  joke  with  each  other.  A  woman  gave 
presents  to  her  brother's  wife.  She  would  resent  infidelity  on  the  part  of 
her  brother's  wife,  and  if  she  quarreled  with  her  might  prevail  upon  her 
brother  to  divorce  her. 

Young-crane  declared  that  she  had  exactly  the  same  feelings  for  half- 
brothers  and  half-sisters  as  for  full  Ceschwister  and  that  it  made  no  difference 
whether  the  relationship  was  through  the  father  or  the  mother. 

In  general  it  may  be  said  that  whatever  differences  of  sentiment  per 
sisted  with  reference  to  differently  related  individuals  designated  by  the 
same  kinship  term  there  was  a  conscious  effort  not  to  let  the  fact  color  one's 
practical  conduct.  It  seems  that  a  Crow  regarded  it  as  a  matter  of  honor 
to  treat.,  say,  an  adopted  child  as  well  as  his  own  children, —  if  anything, 
better.  In  Crow  folklore  the  wicked  stepmother  does  not  play  the  part 
she  assumes  in  European  tales,  and  though  I  recall  a  story  in  which  a  cruel 
stepfather  figures  this  is  an  isolated  instance. 

MARRIAGE. 
. 

A  man  had  a  preemptive  right  to  the  younger  sisters  of  a  woman  he  had 
bought  in  marriage.  Some  men  married  a  brother's  widow;  this  was 
called  u'ak-kura^  +  u,  "keeping  a  brother's  wife." 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  75 

As  explained  in  my  previous  paper,1  there  was  abundant  opportunity 
for  philandering  on  such  occasions  as  berry-picking  (amatdi'  aritskisu^a) 
and  it  happened  that  young  people  would  form  a  permanent  attachment 
on  such  occasions  without  further  ceremony.  This  type  of  union  was 
called  bats  —  cird  -f-  u,  "taking  each  other."  Sometimes  a  young  man  used 
a  go-between  to  make  an  offer  to  a  young  woman,  and  this  was  designated 
as  bl'd-kus-  ird  +  u,  "  talking  towards  a  woman." 

The  most  honorable  form  of  marriage  was  buying  a  wife,  I'wiciriC'  a, 
"paying  for  her."  That  is,  a  man  would  give  horses  to  her  male  relatives 
(ic-batst'o)  and  meat  to  her  mother.  It  was  usually  a  young,  good-looking 
and  virtuous  woman  who  was  purchased  but  it  did  not  matter  whether  she 
had  been  previously  married.  "Men,"  said  Gray-bull,  "would  buy  a 
woman  who  was  not  crazy.  The  Lumpwoods  never  came  to  the  door  of 
my  tipi  to  take  away  my  last  wife.  That  is  the  sort  of  wife  we  paid  for." 
This  is  an  allusion  to  the  custom  by  which  a  member  of  the  Lumpwood  or 
rival  Fox  organization  might  carry  off  the  wife  of  a  member  of  the  other 
society  provided  he  had  ever  been  on  terms  of  intimacy  with  her.2 

Women  stolen  in  this  fashion  were  not  usually  kept  for  any  length  of 
time.  Shell-necklace  abducted  three  women  in  this  manner  but  did  not 
live  with  any  of  them  longer  than  twenty  days.  He  let  them  stay  in  a 
lodge  other  than  his  real  wife's.  There  were  some  men  who  would  keep 
these  stolen  women  but  the  majority  sent  them  away  with  such  words  as, 
kan-ctt  +  awdxpc,  bare'  tk\  kand'f  "I  have  done  marrying  you,  go  away!" 
After  this  any  man  might  marry  her  without  being  disgraced,  except  the 
husband  from  whose  lodge  she  had  been  stolen. 

When  a  woman  abandoned  a  man  she  disliked,  this  was  called  batst'  - 
kurupi'u,  "disliking  a  man."     Shell-necklace  said,  contrary  to  Gray-bull's 
earlier  statement,  that  in  such  a  case  the  husband  recovered  the  property 
he  had  paid  for  her.     A  woman's  relatives  sometimes  tried  to  dissuade  her 
from  running  away  from  her  husband. 

The  attitude  of  divorced  spouses  towards  each  other  in  later  life  naturally 
differed  with  different  individuals.  One  interpreter  told  me  that  his  father 
and  mother  hated  each  other  and  never  had  any  social  intercourse.  Corre 
spondingly,  Young-crane  informed  me  that  she  at  first  refused  to  be  adopted 
into  the  Tobacco  society  by  her  former  husband,  Hunts-the-enemy,  but 
was  finally  persuaded  by  her  then  husband,  Crazy-dog.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  are  cases  of  divorced  mates  who  converse  on  amicable  terms. 

Some  concrete  data  as  to  married  life  are  of  considerable  interest. 

Young-crane  married  her  first  husband,  a  chief,  before  her  first  menses. 


Lowie,  (c),  220  et  seq. 
Cf.  Lowie,  (d),  169. 


76  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

He  had  already  married  her  elder  sister  and  at  the  time  of  his  death  had  two 
other  wives, —  one  of  them  a  relative  belonging,  like  the  informant,  to  the 
a'cbatcud.  The  three  related  women  inhabited  the  same  lodge,  while  the 
fourth  wife  lived  in  a  separate  tipi;  but  sometimes  all  the  wives  of  a  man, 
even  if  unrelated,  lived  together.  This  first  husband  had  been  married  to  a 
wife  whom  he  divorced  and  by  whom  he  had  four  children.  When  he  took 
to  wife  Young-crane,  he  gave  her  elder  brother  two  horses  and  other  pres 
ents.  She  had  no  children  by  him,  but  her  elder  sister  had  three,  of  whom 
Packs-hat  is  the  oldest.  He  has  always  called  Young-crane  "mother"; 
when  she  later  married  Hunts-the-enemy,  Packs-hat  called  him  "father," 
as  he  also  did  his  own  mother's  second  husband;  he  continued  to  address 
Hunts-the-enemy  in  this  way  even  after  Young-crane's  divorce  from  him, 
and  later  when  she  married  Crazy-head  called  him  "father"  also.  Young- 
crane's  first  husband  was  killed  and  after  awhile  she  had  Hunts-the-enemy 
for  a  lover  and  accordingly  married  him  without  purchase.  However, 
he  also  took  to  wife  a  relative  of  Young-crane's  whom  she  designated  as  her 
grandchild  (macb(Tpite]  and  who  called  her  husband  "father."  This 
angered  her.  All  the  people  thought  Hunts-the-enemy  had  done  some 
thing  wrong  in  marrying  a  girl  who  called  him  "  father"  and  said  he  was 
crazy.  Accordingly,  Young-crane  separated  from  him.  Later  Crazy- 
head  wished  to  marry  her,  and  since  he  was  a  chief  her  brothers  advised 
her  to  take  him,  and  so  she  did  without  being  purchased. 

When  Gray-bull  was  about  twenty-two,  he  married  for  the  first  time. 
He  had  been  out  on  a  war  party  and  when  he  came  back  he  found  a  young 
woman  who  had  come  to  his  home,  so  he  married  her.  She  had  a  son  by 
him,  but  the  boy  died.  After  about  four  years  of  marriage,  she  discovered 
that  her  husband  had  been  out  berry-picking  with  another  young  woman, 
so  she  got  angry  and  told  him  to  marry  her  rival.  Accordingly,  Gray-bull 
threw  all  her  belongings  out  of  the  tent,  and  she  left  him.  Then  Gray-bull 
went  to  where  his  sweetheart  was  and  married  her  without  purchase.  She 
was  stolen  by  the  Lumpwoods  and  Gray-bull  never  went  near  her  for  a 
year,  and  even  then  he  did  not  seek  her  but  she  came  to  him.  However,, 
he  did  not  keep  her  permanently.  It  was  only  for  his  last  wife  that  prop 
erty  was  paid.  She  was  a  virtuous  woman,  the  widow  of  a  brother  of 
Gray-bull's,  who  had  been  killed.  When  Gray-bull's  mother  urged  him  to 
marry  this  woman,  he  at  first  declined,  but  at  last  consented.  Then 
another  brother  of  his  took  a  horse  and  some  property  to  the  widow's 
mother,  the  horse  being  for  the  widow's  father  and  the  other  gifts  for  her 
brothers.  Some  time  after  this  one  of  the  woman's  brothers  bade  him  stay 
in  his  lodge.  Then  one  of  her  brothers  came,  stood  outside  the  tipi,  and 
called  Gray-bull.  Then  he  went  with  them  and  two  of  his  own  brothers 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  77 

to  the  woman's  lodge.  She  was  seated  on  a  fine  bed  and  had  a  backrest 
there.  Gray-bull's  brothers  went  to  the  rear  and  sat  down,  and  all  of  them 
received  food.  When  they  had  eaten,  the  brothers  went  home  and  Gray- 
bull  remained  and  lay  with  his  wife.  He  felt  bashful  because  she  had  not 
been  his  mistress  before. 

POSITION  OF  WOMEN. 

The  fact  that  the  women  certainly  perform  all  the  menial  household 
duties  and  are  ordered  about  by  their  husbands  in  regard  to  bringing  water 
and  the  like  is  likely  to  convey  the  idea  that  the  position  of  women  was  a 
very  inferior  one  in  Crow  society.  Random  references  to  women  in  myth 
and  song,  and  indeed  the  deliberate  bravado  with  which  the  ideal  Crow 
man  might  discard  his  wife  at  a  dance  or  allow  her  to  be  abducted  by  a 
rival  organization,  tend  to  confirm  this  impression. 

Nevertheless,  as  in  the  case  of  sexual  morality,  superficial  appearances 
are  in  a  measure  deceptive  as  to  the  real  native  point  of  view.  In  the  first 
place,  it  is  worth  noting  that  a  woman  exercises  definite  property  rights. 
In  buying  specimens  I  noticed  repeatedly  that  husbands  did  not  attempt 
to  influence,  let  alone  force,  wives  in  regard  to  the  sale  of  their  belongings. 
It  is  further  noteworthy  that  while  women  were  naturally  barred  from  the 
distinctively  military  men's  clubs  they  play  an  important  part  in  the 
sacred  Tobacco  society.  WTomen  secured  visions,  though  less  frequently 
than  men;  and  some  of  them  were  medical  practitioners  and  exercised 
supernatural  powers.  As  the  Crow  had  a  very  definite  conception  of  ideal 
manhood,  so  they  have  a  clear  notion  of  what  a  woman  should  be, —  virtuous, 
skilled  in  feminine  accomplishments,  physically  attractive.  This  complex 
is  summed  up  in  the  expression  blitsik' ,  "She  is  a  good  woman,"  which 
perhaps  corresponds  to  our  "perfect  lady"  with  the  addition  of  good  looks. 
A  woman  of  this  type  was  certainly  well  thought  of  and  might  exert  con 
siderable  influence  on  her  husband. 

It  is  further  clear  that  the  bold  face  put  on  when  a  woman  was  abducted 
often  merely  served  as  a  mask  for  profound  grief.  Indeed  the  stoical 
decorum  so  emphatically  demanded  by  tribal  etiquette  indicates  how  diffi 
cult  an  achievement  this  triumphing  over  one's  emotions  was  considered. 
When  Gray-bull  lost  his  wife  in  the  spring  contest  of  the  Foxes  and  Lump- 
woods  he  bravely  bade  her  go  with  his  rival,  but  interrupting  his  narrative 
at  this  point  he  said  to  me,  "  If  you  have  ever  been  married,  you  know  how 
this  felt."  ' 

W'hether  what  has  been  called  "romantic  love"  is  less  common  among 

1   Lowie,  (d),  171. 


78  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

the  Indians  than  in  our  own  everyday  life,  it  would  be  difficult  to  say. 
An  educated  interpreter  ridiculed  the  notion  of  a  man's  committing  suicide 
because  of  unrequited  affection,  but  Werthers  are  not  so  common  among 
us  as  he  seems  to  have  inferred  from  a  reading  of  novels.  At  all  events, 
Crow  literature  also  comprises  narratives  of  a  hero  undergoing  dangers  and 
achieving  arduous  tasks  "  all  for  the  love  of  a  lady,"  while  one  story  recounts 
how  a  young  woman  braved  all  the  perils  and  privations  of  a  long  overland 
journey  through  hostile  territory  in  order  to  reach  her  disabled  sweetheart. 


SEXUAL  MORALITY. 

In  his  discussion  of  the  social  life  of  the  Yukaghir,  Mr.  Jochelson  empha 
sizes  the  difference  between  theory  and  practice  as  regards  the  sexual 
relations  of  this  people.1  Exactly  the  same  point  may  be  made  with  regard 
to  the  Crow.  In  practice  there  is  great  looseness  of  manners,  though  the 
established  rules  of  propriety  are  strictly  observed.2  War  and  love  are 
described  as  the  old  Crow  men's  principal  occupations,  and  the  mythology, 
the  reminiscences  of  informants,  and  ancient  songs  are  all  surcharged  with 
evidence  of  the  tendency  to  apparently  unlimited  philandering.  To  a 
superficial  observer  it  would  appear  as  though  this  masculine  license  were 
even  today  extended  to  the  female  sex.  Young  women  of  notorious  im 
morality  are  not  only  not  regarded  as  outcasts  but  in  some  instances  are 
even  taken  to  wife  by  young  men  who  to  all  appearances  might  have  made 
better  matches.  Their  outward  treatment,  whether  they  are  married  or 
not,  seems  to  differ  not  one  whit  from  that  accorded  to  other  women. 

Nevertheless,  as  already  explained,  the  Crow  have  very  definite  ideals 
of  feminine  purity.  A  man  certainly  prides  himself  on  being  married  to  a 
woman  of  irreproachable  chastity,  and  a  wife  of  this  type  enjoys  a  very 
different  reputation  and  social  status  from  that  of  a  "  crazy"  one,  as  unchaste 
women  are  usually  described.  On  public  occasions  precedence  was  yielded 
to  the  virtuous  women.  When  Young-jack-rabbit  had  distinguished 
himself  in  battle,  his  grandmother,  who  "had  never  done  anything  wrong," 
led  him  about  camp  and  sang  his  praises.  During  the  Sun  dance  the  highly 
honorary  office  of  tree-notcher  was  bestowed  on  a  woman  who  had  been 
taken  to  wife  in  the  most  honorable  way,  i.  e.,  one  who  had  not  run  away 
with  her  lover  but  had  been  decently  married  by  purchase,  and  who  had  been 


i  Jochelson,  62,  65. 

-  Thus,  my  interpreter  twitted  me  with  the  fact  that  while  whites  censured  the  Indian's 
immorality  a  brother  would  not  hesitate  to  speak  freely  with  his  sister,  which  no  decent 
Crow  would  do  (see  p.  38). 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  79 

uniformly  faithful  to  her  husband.  Chastity  was  likewise  a  prerequisite 
for  another  office  in  the  same  ceremony.1 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  even  theoretically  there  was  a  double  stand 
ard  of  morality.  No  one  thought  any  the  wrorse  of  a  man  of  prominence  for 
having  indulged  in  numerous  love  affairs:  these  were  rather  regarded  as  his 
rightful  share  of  the  good  things  of  life.  When  a  young  man  had  assumed 
the  especially  dangerous  office  of  a  Crazy  Dog,2  an  old  man  would  lead  him 
through  camp,  announcing  that  since  he  was  going  to  die  the  girls  of  the 
tribe  who  wanted  to  become  his  sweethearts  must  hasten  to  make  overtures 
to  him.  One  of  my  youngest  interpreters,  who  had  recently  been  married, 
would  speak  quite  freely  of  the  possibility  of  amours  with  other  women, 
but  he  became  grave  in  considering  the  case  of  his  wife  being  disloyal. 
"Do  you  know  what  I  should  do?"  he  asked  me;  "I  should  never  look  at 
her  or  have  anything  more  to  do  with  her." 

That,  however,  a  certain  preferential  respect  was  accorded  to  a  man  of 
virtue  is  shown  by  another  Sun  dance  usage.  An  expedition  for  the  purpose 
of  bringing  white  clay  was  always  led  by  a  man  who  had  never  taken  liber 
ties  with  any  women  but  his  own  wife,  even  in  the  case  of  licensed  privileges.3 


PRIVILEGED  FAMILIARITY.* 

Some  additional  details  were  obtained  regarding  the  joking-relationship. 

If  a  person's  mother  had  a  second  husband,  her  children  regarded  the 
clan  children  of  both  their  own  and  their  stepfather  as  i'watku#u^d.  Thus, 
Gray-bull  treated  as  in  this  category  both  the  children  of  birik-5'oce  men 
(his  own  father's  clansmen)  and  of  acitslte  men  (members  of  his  stepfather's 
clan). 

TJ'uciec  has  One-star  for  one  of  his  joking-relatives.  He  would  abuse 
him  as  follows:  dl  wird  xba'k*  xawl'  k- ;  baco"  di*  d  ra,  dl  wirdx  ba'k*  xawl'k- ; 
"You  are  a  bad  person;  whatever  you  do,  you  are  a  bad  person."  If  a 
war  party  returned  unsuccessful,  the  I'watkusu'd  of  the  warriors  made  fun 
of  them.  tl'uciec  explained  that  after  the  hair-cutting  performance  there 
was  no  more  licensed  joking  (icitse'cua)  between  the  persons  concerned  for 
the  rest  of  their  lives:  kam-bat-ictitse'ce-su-k,  "They  did  not  joke  any 
more."  The  joking-relationship  includes  people  of  opposite  sex.  Old- 
dog  would  chide  a  female  l'  icatkusifd,  saying  dl  we?  warax',  dl  roka'sak*, 


i  Lowie,  (e),  30,  35. 
5  Lowie,  (c),  193. 

3  Lowie,   (e),  42. 

4  Cf.  Lowie,  (c),  204-206,  214  f. 


80  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

"You  are  a  crazy  one,  you  are  lecherous."  He  would  say  this  whether 
it  was  true  or  not,  in  reply  she  would  call  him  crazy  or  abuse  him  in  some 
other  way. 

My  earlier  statement  that  children  of  men  belonging  to  linked  clans 
were  also  I'watkusu^d  stands  corroborated.  Gray-bull  illustrated  this 
specifically  by  the  case  of  children  of  men  of  the  acitsite  and  acirari'o  clans. 
This  extension,  however,  leads  to  an  interesting  possibility.  Since  a  man 
was  not  prohibited  from  marrying  into  a  clan  linked  with  his  own,  it  was 
possible  for  his  children  to  be  his  joking-relatives.  Thus,  Bull-tongue  is  an 
acirari'o,  while  his  father  was  acitsite.  Bull-tongue  and  his  daughter 
accordingly  both  have  fathers  of  the  same  phratry  and  accordingly  the  young- 
woman  would  be  privileged  to  treat  Bull-tongue  and  his  clansmen  as  I'wat- 
kusifd.  This,  however,  is  entirely  contrary  to  the  notion  that  the  father's 
clan  must  be  treated  with  special  respect.  My  informant  was  of  opinion 
that  in  such  a  case  a  little  joking  might  be  permissible,  but  not  the  usual 
form  of  license. 

As  explained  elsewhere,  "brothers-in-law"  were  treated  with  great 
respect,  and  especially  the  real  brother-in-law,  i.  e.,  the  wife's  own  brother 
and  vice  versa.  However,  the  more  remote  brothers-in-law  were  some 
times  mocked  in  connection  with  war  exploits.  Thus,  Old-dog  will  say  to 
White-man-runs-him,  who  is  married  to  one  of  Old-dog's  clan  sisters: 
duxirarerctk* ,  "You  have  never  been  on  a  war  party."  White-man-runs- 
him  responds  in  similar  fashion.  Gray-bull  joked  with  Scolds-the-bear, 
but  the  latter  was  afraid  to  return  in  kind  because  of  Gray-bull's  superior 
war  record.  Under  no  circumstances  is  there  obscene  joking  with  any 
member  of  the  "brother-in-law"  group. 

A  man  has  the  privilege  of  treating  with  the  greatest  license  his  brother's 
wife  and  his  wife's  sister,  even  if  the  latter  should  be  married.  He  might 
raise  his  brother's  wife's  dress,  exposing  her,  and  she  might  do  the  same  to 
him.  A  woman  might  also  take  liberties  with  her  elder  sister's  husband. 
In  the  summer  of  1916  I  spent  considerable  time  in  the  camp  of  an  inform 
ant,  who  was  continually  teasing  and  fondling  his  wife's  younger  sister, 
while  she  returned  this  treatment  in  kind.  They  took  the  greatest  liberties 
without  regard  to  my  presence  or  that  of  my  informant's  wife  or  that  of  his 
adult  son  by  another  marriage.  According  to  Gray-bull,  this  type  of 
familiarity  ceases,  however,  when  the  wife's  sister  marries  another  man. 
For  example,  he  himself  continued  speaking,  but  no  longer  played  and 
joked  with  a  certain  wroman  after  her  marriage  to  Horn. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 


ETIQUETTE. 

When  a  visitor  comes  to  a  tipi,  the  host  may  say  kahc'  by  way  of  greet 
ing,  and  this  interjection  is  also  used  in  addressing  supernatural  beings  in 
prayer.  If  the  inmates  of  the  lodge  happen  to  be  outside  they  may  say 
to  the  guest,  bire'ri',  "Enter."  He  is  made  to  sit  in  the  aco'ria,  i.  e.,  the 
rear  of  the  lodge,  the  place  of  honor.  If  a  woman  is  visited  by  her  husband's 
wife  or  an  adopted  child,  she  bids  them  sit  in  the  rear;  other  female  visitors 
sit  anywhere. 

A  man  does  not  enter  a  lodge  if  his  sister  or  brother-in-law  or  any  of  the 
wife's  relatives  coinprised  under  the  term  usu'a  is  there  alone.  If  he  finds 
any  woman  alone  in  a  lodge,  he  is  not  likely  to  enter  unless  she  is  a  sister-in- 
law;  and  correspondingly  a  woman  does  not  enter  a  lodge  where  she  sees 
a  man  by  himself  unless  he  be  a  lover  or  a  relative  other  than  a  brother. 

If  a  visitor  comes  with  his  wife,  they  take  seats  opposite  to  the  host  and 
his  wife,  but  if  that  side  is  occupied  they  go  to  the  rear.  When  they  have 
no  visitors,  a  couple  usually  occupies  the  place  where  the  blankets  are  spread 
for  sleeping,  generally  on  the  sides  (the  part  of  the  lodge  called  i^cg-cwatsua), 
No  matter  at  what  time  of  day  a  visitor  arrives,  food  of  some  sort  is  at 
once  offered  to  him  or  her.  In  the  old  days  this  consisted  mainly  of  pounded 
meat  (ba'ndatsia)  or  something  of  the  sort.  It  was  not  obligatory  to  eat 
up  everything;  sometimes  a  visitor  would  take  home  what  was  left.  This 
was  considered  perfectly  proper:  ari'pdetk,  "It  did  not  matter."  Some 
times  a  guest  would  ask  for  a  container  in  which  to  take  the  food  home. 
The  hosts  do  not  have  to  eat  at  the  same  time  with  their  visitors.  In  the 
old  days  the  people  ate  when  they  were  hungry. 

I  have  myself  had  occasion  to  observe  again  and  again  that  guests  do 
not  usually  eat  in  the  immediate  company  of  their  hosts  even  if  all  partook 
of  food  at  the  same  time.  The  usual  arrangement  is  for  each  family  to  eat 
by  themselves.  Sometimes  my  interpreter  and  I  ate  separately  from  the 
other  people;  and  almost  always  every  man  formed  a  distinct  group  wTith 
his  wife  and  children,  so  that  on  some  occasions  there  were  as  many  as  four 
groups.  Once  Bright-wing  was  seen  to  join  Magpie  and  his  wife,  which 
Gray-bull  explained  by  saying  the  former  was  Magpie's  brother. 

When  people  meet  outdoors,  they  do  not  use  any  expression  correspond 
ing  to  our  passing  the  time  of  day  but  will  probably  ask,  co'  k'araro\  "  \Vhere 
do  you  come  from?"  or  sa'p  didra,  "What  are  you  doing?"  On  my  return 
to  the  Crow  Reservation  one  summer,  an  Indian  greeted  me  with  the  remark: 
di  awdkam,  mi  ite'k  • ,  "  I  am  glad  to  see  you  "  (literally,  I  see  you,  I  am  better). 
On  a  similar  occasion  a  Crow  said,  hinc'  batse'k-aVcc  karahu'-tsitse^k- ,  "This 
dear  man  has  come,  it  seems." 


82  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

Crow  men  do  not  kiss  their  wives  or  sweethearts  publicly;  only  young 
children  are  kissed  in  the  presence  of  other  people.  However,  I  have  seen 
a  newly  married  young  man  caressing  his  wife  though  without  kissing  her. 

In  referring  to  a  deceased  person,  particularly  if  related  to  one  present, 
it  is  customary  to  use  a  euphemism,  saying  not  karace'  k,  "He  is  dead," 
but  k'oresak,  "He  is  not  here."  Thus,  e.  g.,  my  interpreter  designated 
Gray-bull's  dead  wife  in  speaking  to  her  husband. 

A  man  often  refers  deprecatingly  to  his  own  achievements,  but  this  is 
mock-modesty  and  he  knows  perfectly  well  that  his  audience  is  perfectly 
aware  of  the  facts.  Once  Gray-bull,  in  spite  of  his  excellent  war  record, 
adopted  this  tone,  saying,  "  I  have  never  done  anything  in  war."  Young- 
crane,  his  son's  mother-in-law,  fearing  that  I  might  misunderstand,  at  once 
explained  that  Gray-bull  was  a  very  brave  man  indeed. 


SOCIAL  ESTIMATION  OF  INDIVIDUALS. 

In  his  little  book  on  Anthropology  Doctor  R.  R.  Marett  has  rightly 
emphasized  the  importance  of  individual  differences  even  in  the  most 
primitive  society.  This  fact,  which  has  been  repeatedly  observed  by  field- 
workers,  is  certainly  very  noticeable  among  the  Crow.  It  appears,  e.  g., 
in  the  contrast  between  the  abstract-like  version  of  a  myth,  or  the  colorless 
account  of  an  actual  happening,  furnished  by  one  informant  and  the 
graphic  narrative  of  another.  The  point  I  should  like  to  make  in  this 
connection  is  that  the  Indians  are  quite  conscious  of  these  individual  varia 
tions,  and  further  that  the  place  occupied  in  society  by  a  man  as  a  result 
of  his  individuality  depends  not  merely  on  his  qualities  but  also  on  the 
traditional  sense  of  values. 

So  far  as  the  ancient  Crow  are  concerned,  prestige  depended  primarily 
on  martial  glory.  Though  the  Government  recognizes  Plenty-coups  as 
chief  of  the  Crow,  the  natives  who  still  cling  to  the  old  ways  generally  regard 
Bell-rock  as  the  foremost  Crow, —  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  he  has  not  been 
at  all  prominent  in  dealings  with  the  United  States.  The  point  is  simply 
that  in  his  record  for  war  exploits  he  is  the  foremost  of  living  men.  In  the 
estimation  of  the  Crow  he  therefore  takes  precedence  of  Plenty-coups  and 
Medicine-crow,  though  both  of  these  likewise  have  an  excellent  score  to 
their  credit.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  quite  impossible  to  make  the  people 
yield  homage  to  a  man  who  has  not  attained  the  full  status  of  a  chief  in  the 
customary  way.  Thus,  White-man-runs-him  has  gained  a  certain  amount 
of  celebrity  among  whites  as  the  sole  survivor  of  the  Custer  party  and  has 
served  as  a  member  of  delegations  to  Washington.  Nevertheless,  no  one 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  83 

recognizes  him  as  a  chief.  When  he  acted  as  crier  at  one  of  the  July  festivi 
ties  some  years  ago,  one  of  the  other  Crow  pointed  him  out  as  an  example 
of  the  degeneration  of  tribal  standards.  "In  the  old  days  we  should  not 
have  picked  out  a  man  like  him  to  serve  as  herald." 

This  one-sidedness,  of  course,  prevents  adequate  recognition  of  men  who 
in  other  societies  might  enjoy  an  enviable  prestige.  This  came  home  to 
me  with  special  force  in  the  case  of  Bear-crane.  Bear-crane  had  repeatedly 
acted  as  my  informant,  being  apparently  both  unusually  intelligent  and 
remarkably  well-posted  in  every  subject  of  ethnographic  interest.  Yet 
while  I  was  investigating  the  Sun  dance  with  his  aid,  I  was  repeatedly 
warned  to  place  no  reliance  on  his  statements  because  of  his  utter  untrust- 
worthiness.  This  led  to  a  very  careful  checking  of  his  data  by  my  chief 
interpreter,  James  Carpenter,  and  in  practically  every  instance  Bear-crane's 
accounts  were  found  to  be  corroborated  by  tribesmen  of  unexceptionable 
veracity.  The  psychology  of  the  situation  only  became  clear  when  I  ascer 
tained  Bear-crane's  war  record,  which  was  very  poor  and  which  apparently 
he  had  foolishly  attempted  to  doctor  in  the  customary  recital  of  coups. 
He  thus  acquired  in  addition  the  reputation  of  mendacity,  and  whenever 
I  mentioned  him  to  other  men  his  name  was  at  once  pooh-poohed.  We 
have  here,  then,  a  sociologically  instructive  instance.  A  highly  gifted 
individual  receives  no  recognition  in  his  social  setting  and  is  impelled  to 
make  an  abortive  attempt  at  getting  a  position  from  which  he  is  barred  by 
the  rigidity  of  the  native  canons. 

The  notion  that  it  was  a  man's  duty  to  be  brave  sometimes  found 
exaggerated  expression,  as  among  the  Hidatsa,  in  the  form  of  the  theoretical 
view  that  it  was  proper  to  die  young.  Thus,  an  elder  brother  might  force 
a  younger  one  to  assume  unusual  obligations  of  bravery  not  from  malice 
but  in  order  to  shed  luster  on  his  name.1  The  same  sentiment  is  expressed 
in  the  following  song:  — 

bak'o'  tsi'te          awaxe  awe'-rdk.  baxaria          kawa-uk1. 

Eternal      (is)  the  heaven     and  the  earth.         Old  people        are  bad. 
batsiri'  reta. 
Be  not  afraid. 

This  general  point  of  view  is  illustrated  by  the  actions  of  the  Crazy-dogs- 
wishing-to-die,2  who  were  not  merely  brave  but  foolhardy,  deliberately 
courting  death.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  reason  why  Isacpi'tdakc,  one 
of  the  most  famous  of  these  men,  became  a  Crazy-dog  was  because  a  sore 


i  Lowie,   (d),  166. 

»  See  Lowie,  (d),  193-196. 


84  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

knee  prevented  him  from  joining  the  foot-soldiers  in  their  war  raids.  In 
other  words,  the  impossibility  of  satisfying  the  normal  ambitions  of  a  Crow 
warrior  made  life  unbearable  and  drove  him  to  assume  the  unusual  obliga 
tion  of  recklessness.  The  respect  which  such  conduct  elicited  is  exempli 
fied  by  Spotted-rabbit's  case.  After  becoming  a  Crazy-dog,  this  warrior 
became  the  lover  of  Two-faces'  wife.  Two-faces,  so  far  from  resenting  this 
as  an  injury,  viewed  Spotted-rabbit  as  his  irupxek-a'te  (see  p.  63)  and 
even  sought  to  avenge  his  death. 

In  latter-day  Crow  society  the  principal  means  for  distinction  has  of 
course  become  impossible.  It  has  been  supplemented  partly  by  other 
qualities  esteemed  in  former  times  as  secondary  attributes  of  eminence, 
such  as  liberality,  partly  by  characteristics  displayed  in  dealings  with  the 
Government  officials.  Those  who  attempt  to  curry  favor  with  the  authori 
ties  or  missionaries  to  the  detriment  of  their  own  people  lose  caste,  and  to  a 
lesser  extent  this  applies  to  men  who,  while  ostensibly  defending  their 
tribesmen,  are  suspected  of  being  mainly  actuated  by  motives  of  self- 
aggrandizement.  On  the  other  hand,  those  who  combat  without  after 
thought  what  the  Indians  regard  as  injustice,  even  subjecting  themselves 
to  punishment  on  behalf  of  the  rest,  are  highly  esteemed. 

Women  are  held  in  repute  for  such  qualities  as  chastity  (cf.  p.  77), 
skill  in  feminine  handicrafts,  and  kindliness. 

Apart  from  the  evaluation  of  personalities  in  ioto,  the  Crow  are  keen  in 
recognizing  differences  in  point  of  special  endowments  or  temperament. 
Thus,  No-horse  (bur e' -sac)  was  pointed  out  to  me  as  an  unsurpassed  master 
in  the  use  of  the  Crow  language.  He  will  get  up  in  an  assembly,  I  was  told, 
and  employ  words  which  no  one  has  ever  heard  before  yet  which  are  at 
once  understood  and  felt  to  be  perfectly  correct.  On  my  second  visit  to 
the  Crow,  I  was  advised  again  and  again  to  use  as  an  informant  Old-horn, 
who  was  described  to  me  as  an  incomparable  historiographer  of  his  tribe. 
After  possibly  two  weeks'  arduous  attempt  to  extract  desired  data  from  him, 
I  was  obliged  to  give  him  up  as  a  hopeless  case.  He  had  never  been  a 
member  of  the  Tobacco  society  and  on  most  other  aspects  of  aboriginal 
culture  he  spoke  as  an  outsider.  Whence,  then,  his  reputation?  He 
actually  did  possess  a  remarkable  memory,  especially  for  relationships  and 
had  proved  very  valuable  to  the  Indian  Office  in  aiding  the  adjustment  of 
the  native  matrilineal  scheme  of  inheritance  to  the  laws  of  the  United 
States.  Ignorant  of  my  precise  aims  and  knowing  his  preeminence  in  this 
particular  branch  of  aboriginal  knowledge,  my  advisors  had  quite  sincerely 
directed  me  to  him. 

As  a  social  characteristic  the  ability  to  exchange  good-humored  raillery 
is  highly  prized.  This  is  markedly  noticeable  in  the  intercourse  with  whites, 
where  umbrage  is  taken  at  any  appearance  of  putting  on  airs. 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  85 

Some  people  become  popular  as  purveyors  of  entertainment.  Among 
these  is  AYhite-arm,  who  was  described  to  me  as  "a  regular  clown."  He 
picks  up  threads  of  gossip  and  retails  them  to  interested  audiences,  which 
are  convulsed  with  laughter  at  his  topical  narratives.  Things  which  never 
appeared  funny  before  become  comic  under  his  treatment.  Two  of  his 
favorite  tales  of  this  order  were  recorded  as  texts  and  wherever  I  read  these 
to  groups  of  Indians  I  always  produced  inordinate  merriment.  Of  late 
AYhite-arm  has  become  less  popular  because  of  his  association  with  one  of 
the  Protestant  missions. 

The  loss  of  social  prestige  is  naturally  connected  with  the  absence  of  the 
prized  qualities,  but  as  bravery  is  associated  in  the  native  consciousness 
with  certain  specific  deeds,  so  disgrace  is  correspondingly  the  result  of 
certain  specific  actions  which  are  conventionally  considered  contemptible. 
Offenses  of  this  sort  become  preeminently  the  butt  of  the  i'  watkusud,  and 
the  natives'  extreme  sensitiveness  to  ridicule  renders  the  joking-relationship 
a  very  genuine  corrective  influence. 

One  of  the  things  to  which  the  Crow  are  strongly  averse  is  a  personal 
brawl  among  tribesmen.  They  will  sometimes  contrast  their  attitude  with 
that  of  the  whites  who  exchange  blows  when  at  loggerheads.  "The  white 
people  all  want  to  be  prize-fighters,"  one  of  my  interpreters  said  to  me. 
Gray-bull  told  me  there  was  just  one  bad  thing  scored  against  him  in  the 
tribal  reckoning, —  a  fight  with  a  Crow  chief.  His  tale  runs  as  follows:  — 

We  were  camped  on  the  Yellowstone.  The  Arapaho  were  at  Fort  Custer,  the 
Cheyenne  at  Rosebud.  The  Arapaho  were  friendly.  I  went  hunting  and  got  to  the 
Arapaho.  Some  Arapaho  told  the  Cheyenne  that  a  Crow  was  in  the  Arapaho  camp. 
The  Cheyenne  came  and  wanted  to  kill  me,  but  the  Arapaho  chief  would  not  allow  it. 
One  Cheyenne,  whose  son  had  been  killed  by  our  people,  said  if  he  could  not  kill  the 
Crow  he  wanted  to  whip  him.  So  the  Arapaho  took  away  all  his  weapons  except  his 
whip.  I  went  up  to  him.  He  began  to  whip  me.  He  whipped  me  until  I  no  longer 
felt  it.  The  Cheyenne  was  crying  while  he  whipped  me.  At  last  the  Arapaho  chief 
bade  him  stop. 

I  crossed  the  Bighorn  and  went  down  the  other  bank.  The  whole  Crow  camp 
was  coming  across.  When  they  had  crossed,  the  Cheyenne  were  on  the  other  side  of 
the  river,  but  did  not  cross  in  a  body.  One  of  them,  however,  crossed,  riding  a 
black  horse  and  wearing  a  two-tailed  war-bonnet.  I  said  to  the  Cheyenne,  "I  told 
you  not  to  come  across."  I  went  up  and  whipped  him  so  hard  that  the  feathers  of 
his  bonnet  fell  off.  When  I  got  through  whipping  him,  I  returned  to  the  other  Crow. 
The  chief  of  the  Crow  came  up  and  asked  me  what  I  was  doing.  "  They  whipped  me 
first,  that  is  why."  The  chief  said,  "It  is  nothing  if  they  whipped  you,  you  are  no 
good  any  how."  I  said  nothing.  The  chief  began  to  whip  me.  Now  all  the  Chey 
enne  had  crossed.  He  whipped  me  for  a  while.  When  he  had  done,  I  told  him  he 
was  crazy  and  asked  whether  the  Cheyenne  were  his  brothers  and  why  he  took  their 
side.  I  told  him  that  was  a  good  day  to  die.  The  chief  asked  me  whether  I  wanted 
to  die.  "Yes."  I  took  a  stick  and  hit  the  chief  on  the  nose.  He  just  stooped  over 
and  I  beat  him  with  the  stick.  Another  chief,  Long-horse,  came  and  told  me  to 


86  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

cease,1 1  ceased  and  stood  there.  I  had  two  pistols;  one  I  was  holding  loaded  under 
my  breech-clout.  I  waited  for  the  chief  to  say  something.  He  recovered  from  his 
nose-bleeding,  then  he  told  me  he  was  going  to  kill  me.  I  took  out  my  pistol  from 
under  my  breech-cloth,  but  someone  knocked  up  my  arm  and  I  shot  over  the  chief. 
The  Indians  seized  both  of  us  and  separated  us.  After  that  I  felt  so  badly  that  I  did 
not  know  what  to  do.  I  said  I  was  going  to  kill  one  of  the  Cheyenne,  but  the  rest  of 
the  Crow  would  not  let  me  go.  The  Cheyenne  cheered  while  I  was  being  whipped 
by  the  chief. 

After  this  incident  Gray-bull's  j  ok  ing-relatives  made  fun  of  him.  The  men 
would  say,  e'*k  bare'  ditsl'1,  "That  one  may  strike  us."  The  female  I'wat-kusu' 
would  also  give  warning  of  his  approach,  "There's  that  fighter,  (e"k  b&wurute'c); 
get  out  of  his  way,  he  might  hit  you." 

The  case  of  Fire-bear,  an  Agency  policeman  who  killed  Wraps-up-his- 
tail,  the  sword-bearing  prophet  (about  1888),  was  naturally  regarded, as 
far  more  serious.  He  was  considered  crazy  for  killing  a  fellow-Crow  and 
when  he  approached  everyone,  whether  a  joking-relative  or  not,  would  say: 
ham-di-rapeo,  mita'xare,  "  He  might  kill  some  of  you,  get  back." 

As  liberality  is  considered  a  great  virtue,  miserliness  is  regarded  with 
contempt.  Thus,  it  is  considered  bad  if  a  man  takes  home  a  horse  he  has 
given  away  to  a  brother-in-law  or  some  other  person.  This  is  called  bd*k- 
'unitcite.  If  a  hunter  who  had  killed  deer  or  buffalo  did  not  give  any  of  the 
food  to  another  Crow  who  came  upon  him  while  butchering,  his  stinginess 
was  derided.  People  would  say  to  him,  iruk  ardtsicik-,  "You  love  meat." 
If  a  horse  was  always  kept  by  a  man  until  it  was  very  old  without  being 
given  away,  this  was  not  so  bad,  still  people  would  make  fun  of  the  owner. 

It  was  considered  bad  for  a  man  continually  to  beat  his  wife  without 
cause.  People  would  talk  about  it,  saying,  bl'd  rit'd'k\  "  He  beats  his  wife." 
If  a  party  of  Crow  approached  the  enemy  who  stood  their  ground  and  if 
the  leader  then  turned  aside,  the  people  made  mock  songs  about  him  and 
compared  him  to  a  "bleeding  woman"  (bl  I'maxud}.  This  was,  of  course, 
a  stinging  reproach. 

One  of  the  worst  things  a  man  could  do  was  to  take  back  a  divorced 
woman  or  one  who  had  been  abducted  by  a  rival  society.2  Such  conduct, 
called  bi'd  warci'x  k'urd  +  u  (keeping  a  crazy  woman),  was  regarded  as 
truly  disgraceful.  People  would  say  to  an  offender,  d't'  ise  ritcik-,  "Your 
face  stinks."  Flat-dog,  Old-dog,  Arm-round-the-neck,  and  Yellow-wolf 
are  among  those  who  transgressed  the  rules  of  propriety  in  this  manner. 
People  still  hold  this  against  them,  and  their  joking-relatives  throw  it  in 
their  teeth,  saying,  "You  smell  a  vulva."  Though  Arm-round-the-neck 
is  a  chief,  they  say  this  to  him. 


i  This  is  probably  a  famous  warrior  of  that  name  whom  the  Crow  frequently  mention 
for  his  extraordinary  valor. 
*  Lowie,  (d),  169. 


1917.]  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  87 


CONCLUSION. 

Before  entering  into  a  comparison  of  Crow  and  Hidatsa  social  life,  a  few 
words  seem  in  place  regarding  the  general  culture  of  these  tribes.  While 
probably  every  department  of  thought  and  customs  presents  some  evidence 
of  the  former  unity  of  these  tribes,  there  are  also  noteworthy  differences 
which  may  perhaps  best  be  summarized  by  the  statement  that  the  Hidatsa 
enjoy  a  far  richer  culture  than  their  western  congeners.  Economically, 
they  were  not  merely  buffalo-hunters  but  also  hoe-agriculturists  and  in 
connection  with  this  feature  they  inhabited,  for  part  of  the  year,  settled 
villages  of  earth-lodges.  They  were  (and  to  some  extent  still  are)  conver 
sant  with  the  arts  of  pottery,  basketry,  and  matting,  and  cross  the  Missouri 
in  the  oft-described  bull-boats,  all  of  which  features  are  unknown  to  the 
Crow.  Ceremonially,  the  Hidatsa  have  an  abundance  of  rituals  associated 
with  sacred  bundles,  to  which  there  is  likewise  no  parallel  among  the  Crow. 
Finally,  while  the  published  mythological  material  from  the  Hidatsa  is  not 
adequate  for  a  thorough-going  comparison,  it  is  surprising  how  often  a 
Crow  narrator  gives  to  his  tales  an  Hidatsa  setting,  the  implication  being 
that  at  least  some  of  these  stories  were  borrowed  bodily  from  the  Hidatsa 
stock  of  tales.  That  such  transfer  occurred  in  the  case  of  certain  dances 
and  organizations  is  an  historical  fact.  We  may  assume  that  much  of  the 
relative  complexity  of  Hidatsa  life  is  due  directly  to  Mandan  influence  or 
at  least  indirectly  to  the  stimulation  received  by  contact  with  them,  though 
we  cannot  trace  in  detail  what  was  borrowed  and  what  was  transmitted  as  a 
result  of  this  intercourse.  The  culture  of  the  Hidatsa  differs  from  that 
of  the  Crow  not  merely  by  the  greater  number  and  elaboration  of  discrete 
features  but  also  in  a  marked  trait  of  their  social  psychology, — -  the  tendency 
towards  rationalization  and  systematization.  The  Crow  child,  for  example, 
seems  to  have  grown  up  largely  without  formal  instruction.  Even  on  so 
vital  a  matter  as  the  securing  of  supernatural  favor,  the  adolescent  Crow 
was  not  urged  by  his  elders  but  came  more  or  less  automatically  to  imitate 
his  associates:  others  had  obtained  benefits  through  visions,  hence  he  also 
would  retire  into  solitude  in  expectation  of  a  revelation.  With  the  Hidatsa 
everything  seems  to  have  been  ordered  and  pre-arranged  by  parental 
guidance:  the  father  repeatedly  admonished  his  sons  to  make  appropriate 
offerings  and  obtain  the  requisite  ceremonial  articles,  at  the  same  time 
giving  them  specific  instructions.  The  desire  to  account  for  cultural 
phenomena  is  likewise  very  much  more  highly  developed  among  the  Hidatsa. 
Though  the  tales  accounting  for  the  origin  of  the  exoteric  military  organiza- 


88  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

tions  certainly  do  not  show  Hidatsa  speculation  at  its  best,  they  contrast 
favorably  with  the  bald  statements  or  total  lack  of  statement  by  the  Crow. 
In  accounting  for  their  sacred  rituals  the  Hidatsa,  like  the  Blackfoot, 
largely  draw  on  folk-tales  for  the  incidents  supposed  to  have  led  to  the  insti 
tution  of  their  ceremonials.  Nothing  comparable  was  observed  among  the 
Crow:  the  origin  of  the  chapters  of  the  Tobacco  order,  for  example,  is 
associated  with  specific  visions  but  not  with  a  definite  plot.  It  does  not 
matter  whether  we  assume  that  the  Hidatsa  tales  were  evolved  in  order  to 
account  for  their  rituals  or  were  secondarily  utilized  for  that  purpose: 
in  either  case  a  distinctive  trait  must  be  recognized.  They  must  be  ac 
knowledged  to  reveal,  at  least  in  this  department  of  thought,  either  a 
superior  degree  of  inventiveness  or  a  superior  capacity  for  coordinating  and 
synthetizing  disparate  elements  of  their  culture. 

Associated  with  this  tendency  to  rationalize  and  systematize  there  is 
naturally  far  greater  rigidity,  much  less  variability  in  individual  inter 
pretation  and  conception.  The  names  of  the  Crow  clans,  for  instance, 
have  clearly  changed . considerably  in  the  course  of  time;1  those  of  the 
Hidatsa  appear  to  have  been  immutable,  there  being  no  suggestion  of  other 
designations  than  those  listed  above  and  already  recorded  by  Morgan. 
Versions  of  Crow  myths  sometimes  differ  as  widely  as  if  they  were  collected 
among  distinct  tribes.  Among  the  Hidatsa  I  think  there  is  far  more  con 
formity  to  type,  and  though  my  experience  in  taking  down  their  stories  in 
the  original  is  very  limited  I  received  the  impression  that  even  in  the  phrase 
ology  employed  there  was  a  markedly  greater  tendency  to  preserve  a  tradi 
tional  form.  This  seems  to  me  to  hold  quite  generally.  If  one  inquires 
whether  Old-Man-Coyote  and  the  Sun  are  identical  or  whether  Old-Woman's 
Grandchild  was  ever  addressed  in  prayer,  one  receives  diametrically 
contradictory  replies  from  equally  trustworthy  Crow  natives,  which  is 
hardly  likely  to  occur  in  parallel  Hidatsa  instances.  Even  in  the  applica 
tion  of  kinship  nomenclature,  where  a  certain  fluidity  is  probably  universally 
found,  the  Hidatsa  are  more' consistent  than  the  Crow,  as  may  be  shown  by 
comparing  the  applications  of  the  grandchild  term  and  the  designations  of 
the  mother's  mother's  brother.  It  is  true  that  my  personal  acquaintance 
with  the  Crow  is  much  more  intimate  than  with  the  Hidatsa  and  that  any 
expression  of  opinion  on  the  latter  must  be  weighted  accordingly.  Never 
theless  an  impression  of  contrast  so  definite  and  apparently  so  abundantly 
supported  by  concrete  facts  can  hardly  be  without  an  appreciable  element 
of  justification. 

To  turn  now  to  a  comparison  of  social  organization  and  customs.     The 

i  Lowie,  (c),  190  et  seq. 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  89 

fact  that  the  Hidatsa  and  Crow  clans  do  not  coincide  in  name  is  hardly 
surprising  in  view  of  the  constant  change  of  designation  among  the  Crow 
in  historical  times.  What  is  more  important  for  our  purpose  is  the  complete 
coincidence  of  the  clan  concept.  This  appears  in  the  proper  light  only 
when  we  consider  certain  facts  of  distribution  and  some  correlated  phe 
nomena. 

In  the  first  place,  we  should  note  that,  apart  from  the  Mandan  (whom  we 
may  ignore  for  the  present  on  account  of  inadequate  information),  the 
Crow  and  Hidatsa  are  for  a  radius  of  hundreds  of  miles  the  only  tribes 
having  exogamous  divisions  with  maternal  descent.  Eastward  the  Wyan- 
dot  and  Iroquois,  southward  the  Navajo  and  Hopi,  westward  the  Tsim- 
shian  and  Haida  are  the  nearest  peoples  divided  into  mother-kins.  The 
clans  of  the  Hidatsa  and  Crow  differ  from  other  clans,  first  of  all,  in  type  of 
name,  which  is  almost  uniformly  non-totemic  and  among  the  Crow  belongs 
clearly  to  the  nickname  order.  Secondly,  they  differ  from  those  of  the 
Eastern  and  Northwestern  tribes  in  wholly  lacking  sets  of  honorific  indi 
vidual  names.  Thirdly,  they  are  not  connected  with  crest  privileges  of 
the  North  Pacific  Coast  type  nor  Hopi-fashion  with  any  ceremonial  duties 
or  prerogatives.  In  short,  beyond  those  traits  involved  in  the  definition 
of  an  exogamous  mother-kin  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  clans  share  no  traits 
whatsoever  with  the  clans  of  the  other  tribes. 

The  contrast  is  still  more  striking  when  correlated  traits  are  compared. 
The  avunculate  is  highly  developed  among  the  North  Pacific  Coast  tribes 
and  the  Hopi  but  no  trace  of  it  appears  among  the  Hidatsa  and  Crow,  nor 
do  we  find  the  women  prominent  in  political  activity  as  among  the  Iroquois. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  share  a  conception  of  the  rela 
tions  with  the  father's  clan  which  to  my  knowledge  is  unique.  Some  of  the 
relevant  traits  have  parallels  elsewhere;  but  so  far  as  I  know,  no  other  tribe 
has  developed  the  notion  to  such  an  extent  as  both  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa 
that  the  father's  clans-folk  are  preeminently  the  people  to  receive  gifts; 
none  defines  the  joking-relationship  through  paternal  clan  connections; 
and  nowhere  else  are  nicknames  derived  not  for  one's  own, actions  but  from 
those  of  a  father's  clansman.  Finally,  we  must  mention  in  this  connection 
certain  significant  resemblances  in  kinship  nomenclature.  Unlike  probably 
all  other  North  American  tribes,  there  is  no  uncle  term  in  either  language, 
the  mother's  brother  being  classed  with  the  brother.  Associated  with  this 
classification  within  the  mother-kin  we  find  a  characteristic  designation  of 
cross-cousins,  the  maternal  uncle's  children  being  placed  in  the  first  de 
scending  and  the  paternal  aunt's  in  the  first  ascending  generation.  The 
application  of  a  single  term  to  the  paternal  aunt  and  all  her  female  de 
scendants  through  females,  regardless  of  generation,  proves  to  my  mind 


90  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

that  we  are  here  dealing  with  a  clan  phenomenon;  especially  since  various 
Siouan  tribes  with  paternal  descent  show  a  characteristic  difference  intelligi 
ble  only  by  the  different  rule  of  descent.  It  is  true  that  the  cross-cousins 
and  the  female  descendants  of  the  paternal  aunt  are  designated  by  the  Hopi 
in  the  Crow-Hidatsa  fashion;  whence  the  argument  might  be  advanced 
that  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  independently  of  each  other  evolved  a  termi 
nology  reflecting  their  clan  system.  But  when  we  consider  that  this  by  no 
means  common  feature  is  associated  in  Crow  and  Hidatsa  terminology 
with  an  (except  for  a  trace  among  the  Blackfoot)  unique  mode  of  classifying 
the  mother's  brother,  not  to  speak  of  other  specific  similarities,  the  sugges 
tion  of  independent  origin  for  the  relationship  features  in  question  becomes 
absurd  in  the  light  of  known  tribal  relations.  Negatively,  the  non-recogni 
tion  of  the  commonly  designated  relationship  of  nephew  or  niece  must  be 
considered  historically  significant. 

To  sum  up  the  matter  of  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  clans.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  we  are  dealing  with  a  unique  clan  concept  developed  by  the 
parent  tribe,  which  concept  has  persisted  with  various  adherent  features 
in  both  branches  and  both  by  its  positive  and  negative  traits  and  correlates 
stands  out  in  contrast  to  all  other  comparable  clan  systems.  This,  of 
course,  does  not  mean  that  no  differences  have  developed  since  the  separa 
tion  but  simply  that  they  are  subordinate  from  the  broader  historical  point 
of  view.  From  other  angles  of  vision  two  Hidatsa  peculiarities  are,  indeed, 
noteworthy.  First,  we  find  that  the  funeral  proceedings  are  conducted 
by  the  father's  clan,  which  recalls  the  customs  of  remote  tribes.  Secondly, 
attention  must  be  directed  to  the  purchase  of  important  ceremonial  preroga 
tives  from  the  real  father.  This  shows  clearly  how  not  only  the  father's 
group  but  the  father  himself  may  be  of  great  importance  in  a  matrilineally 
organized  society. 

Turning  to  the  larger  social  units,  we  find  no  trace  of  the  dual  division 
among  the  Crow  while  the  loose  and  colorless  phratries  of  the  latter  do  not 
occur  in  Hidatsa  society.  I  conclude  that  both  types  of  unit  developed 
since  the  separation  from  the  parent  tribe,  being  of  more  recent  date  than 
the  clan  system.  I  have  suggested  that  the  dual  division  was  not  borrowed 
by  the  Hidatsa  from  the  Mandan  but  vice  versa;  however,  this  is  a  purely 
tentative  assumption. 

With  regard  to  the  various  social  customs  described  in  the  course  of 
this  paper,  no  exhaustive  summary  of  significant  points  is  possible.  This  is 
due  partly  to  the  wide  distribution  of  these  features,  partly  to  the  lack  of 
data  for  many  of  the  tribes  that  must  be  considered  in  a  survey  of  this  kind. 
For  example,  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  share  the  levirate  and  the  form  of 
polygamous  marriage  with  sisters,  but  these  are  so  common  in  North  Amer 
ica  that  no  special  importance  can  be  attached  to  the  coincidence. 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  91 

To  a  certain  extent  this  applies  also  to  the  parent-in-law  taboo.  While 
by  no  means  universal,  it  is  shared  by  such  remote  North  American  peoples 
as  the  Cree  and  the  Navajo,  and  close  resemblance  of  details  must  be  looked 
for  in  support  of  historical  conclusions.  Yet  even  the  similarities  of  this 
sort  are  often  so  distributed  as  to  defeat  specific  results.  For  example, 
the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  both  permit  a  removal  of  the  taboo  after  bringing  of  a 
scalp  or  the  presentation  of  a  gift;  and  in  both  tribes  the  very  names  of  the 
persons  embraced  in  the  taboo,  and  even  the  words  composing  them,  were 
avoided.  But  the  removal  of  the  restriction  in  the  manner  stated  is  also 
shared  by  the  Mandan,  Assiniboin,  Arapaho,  Cree,  and  Blackfoot;  and  the 
name  taboo  is  found  among  the  Dakota  and  Assiniboin. 

Without  any  pretence  to  completeness  but  merely  in  the  hope  of  secur 
ing  additional  statements  from  fellow-students  I  append  my  notes  on  the 
distribution  of'  the  mother-in-law  taboo.  It  occurs  among  the  Tlingit  and 
Haida; l  Cree,  Assiniboin,  Blackfoot,  Sarsi,  and  Gros  Ventre; 2  Lemhi 
Shoshoni,  Crow,  Hidatsa,  and  Mandan; 3  Dakota,  Ponca,  and  Omaha; 4 
Arapaho,  Cheyenne,  and  Kiowa;5  Navajo  and  Apache;6  Tiibatulabal, 
Western  (not  Eastern)  Mono,  Yokuts,  Miwok,  Porno  and  presumably 
Southern  Wintun7;  Creek  and  Alibamu.8  A  trace  of  the  taboo  —  bashful- 
ness  about  facing  each  other  without  the  rule  against  conversation  —  has 
been  recorded  for  the  Beaver.9  The  mother-in-law  taboo  is  known  to  be 
lacking  among  the  Kwakiutl  and  Nootka;  10  the  Arikara  (p.  48)  and 
Pawnee;  u  Ojibway;  12  Zuni  and  Hopi;  13  Comanche,  Wind  River  Sho 
shoni,  Ute,  Paviotso,  and  Paiute;14  Yurok,  Yuki,  Kaw7aiisu,  Luiseno,  and 
Mohave.15. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  cases  where  absence  of  information  is 
probably  due  to  the  recorder's  neglect.  Thus,  very  little  is  known  as  to 
the  range  of  the  taboo  between  father-in-law  and  daughter-in-law.  It  is 
probably  everywhere  weaker  than  the  mother-in-law  taboo,  yet  its  re- 


S wanton,  424;    id.  personal  information. 

Kane,  393;  Lowie,  (b),41;  Wissler,  (a),  12;  Kroeber,  (b),  180. 

Lowie,  (a),  211;    Lowie,  (c),  213;    Maximilian,  II,  132. 

Kiggs,204;  J.  O.  Dorsey,  262f. 

Kroeber,  (a),  9;   information  by  Crow  Indians;   Methvin,  163  f. 

Goddard,  (a),  162. 

Personal  communication  by  Mr.  E.  W.  Gifford;   Kroeber,  (d),  383. 

Personal  communication  by  Doctor  John  R.  Swanton. 

Goddard,  (b),  222. 

Personal  communication  by  Doctor  E.  Sapir. 

James,  I,  262  f. 

Tanner,  146,  but  the  name  of  the  son-in-law  was  tabooed;   Kohl,  273  If. 

Doctor  A.  L.  Kroeber's  and  the  writer's  field  notes. 

Writer's  notes. 

Kroeber,  (d),  383. 


92  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

corded  occurrence  among  the  Dakota,1  Assiniboin,2  Kiowa,3  Arapaho,4  and 
Omaha5  suggests  a  continuous  distribution  with  connecting  links  as  yet 
unnoted.6  We  have  positive  information  that  no  such  rule  of  avoidance 
existed  among  the  Crow  (p.  73)  and  the  Blackfoot,7  but  even  for  the  Hidatsa 
I  can  make  no  such  positive  statement. 

Another  case  in  point  is  the  young  man's  practice  of  sneaking  to  a  lodge 
of  a  night  and  touching  a  girl's  body.8  It  was  in  vogue  among  the  Oglala 
Dakota  and  Assiniboin,9  but  for  all  we  know  it  may  have  been  a  general 
custom  of  the  Plains  region.  Yet  of  the  northern  tribes  the  Oglala  and 
Crow  alone  share  so  significant  a  trait  as  the  licensed  kidnapping  of  each 
other's  wives  by  rival  organizations,10  so  that  the  other  parallel  may  very 
well  turn  out  to  be  a  reflection  of  their  intimate  contact. 

Teknonymy,  i.  e.,  the  designation  of  a  person  as  So-and-so's  father, 
grandfather,  etc.,  is  an  equally  tantalizing  usage.  Crow  and  Hidatsa  both 
use  it  in  the  designation  of  spouses  (p.  34),  but  a  similar  practice  has  been 
noted  for  the  Tlingit  n  while  with  the  Zuni  and  Hopi 12  it  attains  a  pre 
valence  probably  unsurpassed  anywhere  in  the  world.  Does  the  Crow- 
Hidatsa  custom  represent  a  feature  independently  evolved  by  the  parent 
tribe  or  are  we  dealing  with  a  trait  that  has  a  much  wider  range  than  at 
present  appears  and  which,  for  all  we  know,  may  have  been  borrowed  by 
Hidatsa  and  Crow  from  different  directions  since  their  separation?  The 
data  for  a  solution  must  come  from  field-workers. 

Another  custom  shared  by  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  (p.  50)  yet  hardly  to 
be  considered  of  specific  significance  in  the  light  of  present  knowledge  is 
the  close  friendship  between  two  male  comrades.  It  is  very  highly  de 
veloped  among  the  Dakota,13  Blackfoot,14  and  Cheyenne,15  and  even  turns  up 
in  the  Woodland  area.16 

Probably  most,  if  not  all,  North  American  aborigines  have  some  super- 


Riggs,   204. 
Lowie,   (b),  41. 
Writer's  field  notes. 
Kroeber,  (a),  9. 
Fletcher  and  La  Flesche,  334. 

At  least  traces  of  the  custom  are  recorded  for  the  Beaver,  Goddard,  (b),  222;   and  Dr. 
God   ard  tells  me  that  similar  bashfulness  obtains  among  the  Hupa. 
Wissler,  (a),  13. 
Lowie,  (c),  221  f. 
Wissler,  (b),  77;   Kurz,  110,  152. 
Lowie,  (f),  903. 
Krause,  217. 

Kroeber,  (c),  72;   the  writer's  field  notes. 
Riggs,  196. 
Wissler,   (a),  16. 
Mooney,  416. 
Skinner,   (b),  34. 


1917.]  Loivie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  93 

stitious  notions  connected  with  menstruation,  but  the  segregation  of  women 
during  the  menses  is  not  nearly  so  common.  We  have  positive  statements 
as  to  the  absence  of  the  menstrual  hut  among  the  Blackfoot  and  Gros 
Ventre,1  (Vow,2  and  Arapaho,3  and  its  existence  was  not  recorded  for  the 
Hidatsa.  However,  the  hut  is  found  among  the  Dakota  and  Assiniboin,4 
the  Omaha  and  Ponca.5  Outside  the  Plains  region  the  seclusion  of  girls  at 
puberty  is  widespread.  We  find  it,  for  example,  among  the  Tlingit,  Nootka, 
and  Chinook; 6  Hupa  and  Shasta; 7  Pima; 8  Tahltan  and  Chipewyan;9 
Thompson  River  Indians  and  Nez  Perce;  10  Lemhi  and  Wind  River  Sho- 
shoni,  Paviotso  and  Ute;  u  Northern  Saulteaux  and  Menomini; 12  Creek 
and  Yuchi.13  The  range  of  the  custom  suggests  that  its  absence  may  have 
historical  significance. 

The  curious  bashfulness  of  an  adult  brother  and  sister  in  each  other's 
presence  is  common  to  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  (p.  38).  Restrictions  on 
social  intercourse  between  Gcschicisler  of  opposite  sex  are  found  in  Melane 
sia,14  but  the  only  other  recorded  North  American  case  I  know  of  is  that  of 
the  Arapaho.15  This  seems  to  be  a  matter  on  which  few  field-workers  have 
made  specific  inquiries;  a  positive  or  negative  report  on  this  point  will 
henceforth  be  highly  desirable.  The  Yana  rule  that  brother  and  sister  must 
not  address  each  other  in  the  singular  may  turn  out  to  belong  to  the  same 
type  of  taboo.16 

A  particularly  friendly  relationship  betwreen  brothers-in-law  occurs 
among  the  Hidatsa  and  Crow.  I  am  under  the  impression  that  this  is  by 
no  means  peculiar  to  them  and  have  myself  recorded  a  similar  sentiment  on 
the  Wind  River  Shoshoni  Reservation,  but  cannot  at  present  place  my  finger 
on  specific  references  for  other  peoples.  In  connection  with  the  brother-in- 
law  sentiment  there  is,  however,  one  exceedingly  suggestive  detail.  The 
Crow  do  not  permit  personal  references  of  an  obscene  character  in  a  brother- 

1  Wissler,  (a),  29;    Kroeber,  (b),  181. 

2  Lowie,   (c),  220. 

3  Kroeber,  (a),  15. 

4  Lowie,    (b),  39. 

5  J.  O.  Dorsey,  267. 

«  Swan  ton,  428;    Sapir,  (a),  67  ff;    Boas,  246. 

7  Gocidarcl,  (c),  56;    Dixon,  420,  457. 

8  Russell,  183. 

»  Emmons,   104;     Hearne,   313. 

10  Teit.  312;   Spinden,  198. 

11  Lowie,  (a),  214,  and  field  notes;  Hopkins,  48;   writer's  field  notes.     Among  the  South 
ern  Paiute  there  was  the  typical  food  taboo  but  I  got  no  evidence  of  a  special  hut. 

"  Skinner,  (a),  152;    (b),  52.      This  writer  also  ascribes  the  custom  to  the  Sauk,  Fox, 
Kickapoo,  Winnebago,  and  Ottawa. 
«  Speck,  (a),  116;    (b),  96. 

14  Speiser,  217. 

15  Kroeber,   (a),    11. 
"  Sapir,  (b).  95 


94  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

in-law's  presence,  the  offender  being  punished  with  a  blow.1  This  agrees 
exactly  with  the  Arapaho  conception  of  this  relationship 2  and  a  close 
parallel  (without  the  feature  of  the  blow)  has  been  noted  for  the  Blackfoot.3 

Another  feature  common  to  the  Crow  (p.  80),  Arapaho4  and  Black- 
foot  5  is  the  licensed  familiarity  between  a  brother-in-law  and  sister-in-law. 
It  is  also  shared  by  the  Hidatsa  (p.  49),  and  occurs  in  the  Woodland  area.6 

I  cannot  resist  the  temptation  of  calling  attention  to  the  common 
possession  of  a  combination  of  sociological  features  by  the  Crow,  Hidatsa, 
Arapaho,  and  Blackfoot.  An  examination  of  the  age-societies  of  the  Plains 
Indians  led  me  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Hidatsa  must  have  been  in  con 
tact,  on  the  one  hand,  with  the  Arapaho  and  on  the  other  with  the  Black- 
foot.7  We  now  find  that  the  lack  of  a  menstrual  hut  and  the  licensed 
familiarity  between  brother  and  sister-in-law  are  common  to  all  four,  while 
the  brother-sister  bashfulness  is  recorded  for  all  but  the  Blackfoot,  and  the 
obscenity  taboo  between  brothers-in-law  holds  for  all  except  the  Hidatsa. 
Since  no  direct  historical  connection  existed  between  the  Crow  and  Arapaho, 
the  unique  coincidence  in  the  details  of  the  last-mentioned  trait  permits 
the  inference  that  it  is  one  formerly  shared  by  the  Hidatsa.  It  should 
further  be  noted  that  each  of  the  four  features  here  considered  (with  the 
possible  exception  of  the  relations  between  brother  and  sister-in-law)  is 
highly  specific  and  relatively  rare  so  far  as  our  records  go.  For  this  reason  I 
cannot  regard  the  combination  of  resemblances  as  the  result  of  chance,  and 
interpret  it  as  the  effect  of  historical  contact  between  the  Hidatsa  and 
Arapaho.  The  Blackfoot  analogies  do  not  seem  to  me  to  require  the  same 
sort  of  relationship;  since  the  known  Blackfoot-Crow  relations  suffice  to 
account  for  the  transmission  of  the  relevant  features. 

Supreme  contempt  for  the  exhibition  of  jealousy  is  shown  by  the  Crow 
and  Hidatsa  (pp.  86,  45),  but  I  rather  expect  that  more  painstaking  search 
will  unearth  other  instances. 

Finally,  some  attention  must  be  devoted  to  the  joking-relationship. 
Doctor  Rivers  found  it  in  the  Banks  Islands,  where  relatives  by  marriage, 
and  particularly  the  father's  sister's  husband,  are  subject  to  the  practice.8 
The  Hidatsa  and  the  Crow,  to  my  knowledge,  are  the  only  people  in  the 
world  who  regard  the  offspring  of  male  members  of  the  same  clan  as  "chaf- 


1  Lowie,  (c),  214. 

2  Kroeber,  (a),  11. 

3  Wissler,   (a),  12. 

4  Kroeber,  (a),  11. 
*  Wissler,  (a),  12. 

«  Skinner,  (c),  281. 

i  Lowie,  (f),  946-954. 

8  Rivers,  I,  40,  45  ff. 


1917.1  Lowie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  95 

fers,"  and  the  hair-cutting  custom  associated  with  the  joking-relationship 
seems  likewise  peculiar  to  them.  On  the  other  hand,  joking  of  some  sort 
exists  between  quite  different  relatives  elsewhere.  In  the  field  I  learned 
that  a  Hopi  will  play  tricks  on  his  wife's  brother's  son,  who  returns  the  treat 
ment  in  kind  after  reaching  maturity.  According  to  a  personal  communica 
tion  from  Doctor  Radin  the  Winnebago  have  the  joking-relationship 
between  maternal  uncle  and  nephew.  Mr.  Amos  One-road,  an  educated 
Dakota,  described  the  chaffing  of  his  tribe  as  taking  place  between  brothers- 
in-law,  each  belittling  the  other's  achievements  in  war  and  the  chase. 

Here  a  word  of  caution  is  necessary.  We  must  recognize  that  customs 
distinct  both  psychologically  and  historically  may  be  labeled  by  the  catch 
word  "joking-relationship."  This  term,  as  we  have  seen  (pp.  42,  49) 
might  be  extended  to  the  mutual  relations  of  Crow  and  Hidatsa  brothers-in- 
law  and  also  to  those  of  a  brother  and  sister-in-law.  It  is,  however,  clear 
that  the  1'watkuc^  —  makutsati  usage  is  something  different  and  cannot, 
accordingly,  be  equated  with  an  alien  practice  of  chaffing  either,  unless 
characteristic  features  reappear.  Thus,  the  Dakota  "joking-relationship" 
is  evidently  homologous  not  with  what  I  have  called  by  that  term  among 
the  Crow  and  Hidatsa  but  with  the  brother-in-law  chaffing  of  these  people. 
Similarly,  the  usage  that  figures  so  prominently  in  certain  Menomini  folk 
tales  is  the  parallel  of  the  brother  and  sister-in-law  license  not  of  the 
I'  watkiice"-  practice.  It  hardly  requires  the  statement  that  privileged  famil 
iarity  between  persons  of  opposite  sex  must  have  a  different  psychological 
import  from  such  liberties  between  people  of  the  same  sex  or  of  either  sex 
without  preference. 

In  conclusion  a  few  words  may  be  said  on  the  study  of  social  customs. 
While  ample  attention  has  been  granted  to  the  social  organization  of  primi 
tive  tribes,  usages  of  the  type  here  dealt  with  have  often  been  reported  as 
though  they  were  mere  oddities.  A  brief  consideration  of  some  of  the  facts 
cited  suffices  to  show  their  extraordinary  theoretical  value.  In  the  South 
west  the  Apache  and  Navajo  have  the  mother-in-law  taboo  but  the  Hopi 
and  Zuiii  lack  it.  Surrounded  by  tribes  practising  this  custom,  the  Pawnee 
and  Arikara,  both  of  Caddoan  stock,  differ  from  their  neighbors  by  its 
absence.  Of  the  Shoshonean  Plateau  and  Basin  tribes  it  is  found  only 
among  the  Northern  Shoshoni,  who  have  had  much  contact  with  the  Crow 
and  Blackfoot.  Practically  all  the  Plateau  Shoshoneans  share  the  same 
menstrual  customs.  The  recurrence  of  the  Crow  brother-in-law  prudery 
in  Arapaho  society  proves  an  indirect  historical  relation  and  prompts  the 
search  for  intervening  links. 

Reverting  to  the  Crow  and  Hidatsa,  we  have  here  two  tribes  distinct 
from  all  other  Siouans  by  virtue  of  their  close  linguistic  affinity.  In  many 


96  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

respects  their  cultures  have  differentiated  far  more  than  might  be  expected 
on  the  basis  of  this  peculiarly  intimate  relationship.  Yet  both  social 
organization  and  social  customs  preserve  evidence  of  the  unique  connection 
between  them,  and  I  should  say  that  this  applies  rather  to  the  latter  than 
the  former.  Were  it  not  for  the  isolation  of  the  Crow-Hidatsa  mother-kins 
(always  disregarding  the  Mandan)  from  tribes  with  like  units,  their  common 
possession  of  a  clan  system  would  not  be  particularly  impressive.  It  is 
the  correlated  social  usages,  such  as  the  treatment  accorded  to  the  father's 
clan,  and  the  absence  of  traits  correlated  with  clans  of  other  tribes,  such  as 
the  avunculate,  that  give  point  to  the  comparison.  The  derivation  of 
nicknames  from  actions  of  the  father's  clansmen  and  the  i'  watkiic^  custom 
show  that  unique  historical  relations  are  expressed  in  the  parallelism  of 
unique  social  usages.  From  this  point  of  view  the  less  conspicuous  features 
of  primitive  social  life  acquire  a  novel  significance:  they  are  likely  to  be 
sign-posts  of  historical  connection  where  other  divisions  of  culture  yield  no 
evidence.  What  is  more,  in  the  case  of  widespread  customs  it  is  the  most 
trifling  details  that  are  historically  most  significant.  It  is  the  blow  feature 
that  convinces  us  of  community  of  origin  in  the  case  of  the  brother-in-law 
prudery  of  the  Crow  and  Arapaho.  Hence  a  mere  statement  as  to  the 
presence  or  absence  of  these  customs,  while  valuable  enough,  is  not  suffi 
cient;  on  all  such  points  we  require  the  greatest  possible  wealth  of  concrete 
information.  It  is  in  the  hope  of  stimulating  field-workers  to  obtain  such 
data  that  I  have  ventured  to  offer  the  comparative  notes  of  this  chapter. 


1917.]  Loicie,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

BOAS,  FRANZ.  Chinook  Texts  (Bulletin  20,  Bureau  of  American  Ethnology,  Wash 
ington,  1894.) 

CURTIS,  EDWARD  S.     The  North  American  Indian.     Vol.  5.     Cambridge,  1909. 

DIXON,  ROLAND  B.  The  Shasta  (Bulletin,  American  Museum  of  Natural  History, 
vol.  17,  part  5,  New  York,  1907.) 

DORSET,  J.  O.  Omaha  Sociology  (Third  Annual  Report,  Bureau  of  American 
Ethnology,  Washington,  1884.) 

EMMONS,  G.  T.  The  Tahltan  Indians  (Anthropological  Publications,  University 
of  Pennsylvania,  vol.  4,  no.  1,  Philadelphia,  1911.) 

FLETCHER,  ALICE  C.,  and  LA  FLESCHE,  FRANCIS.  The  Omaha  Tribe  (Twenty- 
seventh  Annual  Report,  Bureau  of  American  Ethnology, 
Washington,  1911.) 

GODDARD,  P.  E.  (a)  Indians  of  the  Southwest  (Handbook  Series,  American  Mu 
seum  of  Natural  History,  No.  2,  New  York,  1913.) 

(b)  The    Beaver    Indians    (Anthropological    Papers,    American 

Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  10,  part  4,  New  York, 
1916.) 

(c)  Life  and  Culture  of  the  Hupa  (University  of  California  Publi 

cations  in  American  Archaeology  and  Ethnology,  vol.  1, 
no.  1,  Berkeley,  1903.) 

GOLDENWEISER,  A.  A.  Remarks  on  the  Social  Organization  of  the  Crow  Indians 
(American  Anthropologist,  N.  S.  vol.  15,  pp.  281-297> 
Lancaster,  1913.) 

HANDBOOK  OF  .AMERICAN  INDIANS.  Bulletin  30,  Bureau  of  American  Ethnology. 
2  parts.  Washington,  1907  and  1910. 

HEARNE,  SAMUEL  A.  Journey  from  Prince  of  Wales  Fort  in  Hudson's  Biay  to  the 
Northern  Ocean.  London,  1795. 

HOPKINS,  S.  W.     Life  among  the  Fiutes.     Boston,  1883. 

JAMES,  EDWIN.  An  Account  of  an  Expedition  from  Pittsburgh  to  the  Rocky  Moun 
tains,  performed  in  the  Years,  1819,  1820.  London, 
1823. 

JOCHELSON,  WALDEMAR.  The  Yukaghir  and  the  Yukaghirized  Tungus  (Memoirs, 
American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  13,  part  1, 
Leiden  and  New  York,  1910.) 

KANE,  PAUL.  Wanderings  of  an  Artist  among  the  Indians  of  North  America  from 
Canada  to  Vancouver's  Island  and  Oregon  through  the 
Hudson's  Bay  Company's  Territory.  London,  1859. 

KOHL,  J.  G.     Kitchi-Gami.     Wanderings  Round  Lake  Superior.     London,   1860. 

KRAUSE,  A.  Die  Tlinkit-Indianer.  Ergebnisse  einer  Reise  nach  der  Nordwest- 
kiiste  von  Amerika  und  der  Beringstrasse  ausgefiihrt  im 
Auftrage  der  Bremer  Geographischen  Gesellschaft  in  den 
Jahren  1880-1881.  Jena,  1885. 

KROEBER,  A.  L.  (a)  The  Arapaho  (Bulletin,  American  Museum  of  Natural  His 
tory,  vol.  18,  part  2,  New  York,  1904.) 


98  Anthropological  Papers  American  Museum  of  Natural  History.  [Vol.  XXI, 

(b)  Ethnology    of    the    Gros    Ventre    (Anthropological    Papers, 

American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  1,  part  4, 
New  York,  1908.) 

(c)  Zuni  Kin  and  Clan  (Anthropological  Papers,  American  Mu 

seum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  18,  part  2,  New  York, 
1917.) 

(d)  California     Kinship     Systems     (University     of     California 

Publications  in  American  Archaeology  and  Ethnology, 

vol.  12,  no.  9,  Berkeley,  1917.) 
KURZ,  EMIL.     Aus  dem  Tagebuch  des  Malers  Friedrich  Kurz  iiber  seinen  Aufent- 

halt  bei  den  Missouri-Indianern  1848-1852.      Bearbeitet 

und  mitgeteilt  von  dem  Neffen  des  Malers,  Dr.  Emil  Kurz. 

Berne,   1896. 

LOWIE,  ROBERT  H.     (a)  The  Northern  Shoshone  (Anthropological  Papers,  Ameri 
can  Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  2,  part  2,  New 

York,  1909.) 
(b)  The     Assiniboine     (Anthropological     Papers,     American 

Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  4,  part  1,  New  York, 

1909.) 
~'-(c)  Social  Life  of  the  Crow  Indians  (Anthropological  Papers, 

American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  9,  part  2, 

New  York,  1912.) 

(d)  Societies   of   the    Crow.    Hidatsa   and    Mandan    Indians 

(Anthropological  Papers,  American  Museum  of  Natural 
History,  vol.  11,  part  3,  New  York,  1913.) 

(e)  The  Sun  Dance  of  the  Crow  Indians   (Anthropological 

Papers,  American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  16, 
part  1,  New  York,  1915.) 

(f)  Plains  Indian  Age-Societies:   Historical  and  Comparative 

Summary  (Anthropological    Papers,  American  Museum 

of  Natural  History,  vol.  11,  part  13,  New  York,  1916.) 
MATTHEWS,  WASHINGTON.     Ethnography  and  Philology  of  the  Hidatsa  Indians 

(Miscellaneous   Publications,   United   States  Geological 

and  Geographical  Survey,  no.  7,  Washington,  1877.) 
MAXIMILIAN,  PRINCE  OF  WIED.     Reise  in  das  innere  Nord-America  in  den  Jahren 

1832  bis  1834.     Coblenz,  1841. 
METHVIN,  REV.  J.  J.     Andele  or  The  Mexican-Kiowa  Captive.     A  Story  of  Real 

Life  among  the  Indians.     Louisville,  Kentucky,  1899. 
MOONEY,  JAMES.     The   Cheyenne   Indians    (Memoirs,    American  Anthropological 

Association,  vol.  1,  part  6,  Lancaster,  1907.) 
MORGAN,  LEWIS  H.  i  (a)  Systems  of  Consanguinity  and  Affinity  of  the  Human 

Family  (Smithsonian  Contributions  to  Knowledge,  vol. 

17,  Washington,  1871.) 
(b)  Ancient  Society  or  Researches  in  the  Lines  of  Human 

Progress  from  Savagery  through  Barbarism  to  Civiliza 
tion.     New  York,  1878. 
RIGGS.,  S.  R.     Dakota  Grammar,  Texts,  and  Ethnography  (Contributions  to  North 

American  Ethnology,  vol.  9,  Washington,  1894.) 
RIVERS,  W.  H.  R.     The    History    of    Melanesian   Society.     2    vols.     Cambridge, 

1914. ' 


1917.]  Lome,  Mandan,  Hidatsa,  and  Crow  Social  Organization.  99 

RUSSELL,  FRANK.  The  Pima  Indians  (Twenty-sixth  Annual  Report,  Bureau  of 
American  Ethnology,  Washington,  1908.) 

SAPIR,  EDWARD,     (a)  A  Girl's  Puberty  Ceremony  among  the  Nootka  Indians  (Trans 
actions,  Royal  Society  of  Canada,  vol.  7,  1913.) 
(b)  Yana  Texts  (University  of  California  Publications  in  Ameri 
can  Archaeology  and  Ethnology,  vol.  9,  part  1,  Berkeley, 
1910.) 

SKINNER,  ALANTSON.  (a)  Notes  on  the  Eastern  Cree  and  Northern  Saulteaux 
(Anthropological  Papers,  American  Museum  of  Natural 
History,  vol.  9,  part  1,  New  York,  1911.) 

(b)  Social  Life  and  Ceremonial  Bundles  of  the   Menomini 

Indians    (Anthropological    Papers,    American    Museum 
of  Natural  History,  vol.  13,  part  1,  New  York,  1913.) 

(c)  Folklore  of  the  Menomini  Indians  (Anthropological  Papers, 

American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  13,  part  3, 
New  York,   1915.) 

SPECK,  FRANK  G.  (a)  The  Creek  Indians  of  Taskigi  Town  (Memoirs,  American 
Anthropological  Association,  vol.  2,  part  2,  Lancaster, 
1907.) 

(b)  Ethnology  of  the  Yuchi  (Anthropological  Publications, 
University  of  Pennsylvania,  vol.  1,  no.  1,  Philadelphia, 
1909.) 

SPEISER,  FELIX.  Si'ulsee,  Urwald,  Kannibalen.  Reise-Eindriicke  aus  den  Neuen 
Hebriden.  Leipzig,  1913. 

SPINDEN,  HERBERT  J.  The  Nez  Perce  Indians  (Memoirs,  American  Anthropologi 
cal  Association,  vol.  2,  part  3,  Lancaster,  1908.) 

SWANTON,  JOHN  R.  Social  Condition,  Beliefs,  and  Linguistic  Relationship  of  the 
Tlingit  Indians  (Twenty-sixth  Annual  Report,  Bureau 
of  American  Ethnology,  Washington,  1908.) 

TANNER,  JOHN.  A  Narrative  of  the  Captivity  and  Adventures  of  John  Tanner 
(U.  S.  Interpreter  at  the  Sault  de  Ste.  Marie)  during 
Thirty  Years  Residence  among  the  Indians  in  the  Inte 
rior  of  North  America.  New  York,  1830. 

TEIT,  James.  The  Thompson  Indians  of  British  Columbia  (Memoirs,  American 
Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  2,  part  4,  New  York, 
1900.) 

WILSON,  REV.  E.  F.  Report  on  the  Sarcee  Indians  (Report  of  the  British  Associa 
tion  for  the  Advancement  of  Science,  1888,  London,  1889.) 

WISSLER,  CLARK,  (a)  The  Social  Life  of  the  Blackfoot  Indians  (Anthropological 
Papers,  American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  7, 
part  1,  New  York,  1911.) 

(b)  Societies  and  Ceremonial  Associations  in  the  Oglala  Division 
of  the  Teton-Dakota  (Anthropological  Papers,  American 
Museum  of  Natural  History,  vol.  11,  part  1,  New  York, 
1912.) 


(Continued  from   Id  p.   of  cover.) 

II.     Prehistoric  Bronze  in  South  America.     By  Charles  W.  Mead.     Pp.  15-52, 
and  4  text  figures.     1915.     Price,  $.25. 

III.  Peruvian  Textiles.     By  M.  D.  C.  Crawford.     Pp.  52-104,  and  23  text 
figures.     1915.     Price,  $.50. 

IV.  Peruvian  Fabrics.     By  M.  D.  C.  Crawford.     Pp.  105-191,  and  40  text 
figures.     1916.     Price,  $1.00. 

V.  Conventionalized  Figures  in  Ancient  Peruvian  Art.     By  Charles  W.  Mead. 
Pp.  193-217,  Plates  I-VIII.     1916.     Price,  $.25. 

VI.  (In  preparation.) 

Volume  XIII. 

I.  Social  Life  and  Ceremonial  Bundles  of  the  Menomini  Indians.  By  Alan- 
son  Skinner.  Pp.  1-165,  and  30  text  figures.  1913.  Price,  $1.50. 

II.     Associations  and  Ceremonies  of  the   Menomini   Indians.     By  Alanson 
Skinner.     Pp.  167-215,  and  2  text  figures.     1915.     Price,  $.40. 

III.     Folklore  of  '        Menomini  Indians.     By  Alanson  Skinner  and  John  V. 
Satterlee.     Pp.    217-  191"      Price,    $1.60. 

^olume  XIV. 

I.  The  Stefansson-  „.  .  Arctic  Expedition  of  the  American  Museum: 
Preliminary  Ethnological  Report.  By  Vilhjalmur  Stefdnsson.  Pp.  1-395,  94  text 
figures,  and  2  maps.  1914.  Price,  $3.50. 

II.     Harpoons  and  Darts  in  the  Stefdnsson  Collection.     By  Clark  Wissler. 
Pp.  397-443,  and  44  text  figures.     191(5.     Price,  $.50. 
III.     (In  preparation). 

Volume  XV. 

I.     Pueblo  Ruins  of  the  Galisteo  Basin,  New  Mexico.     By  N.  C.  Nelson. 
Pp.  1-124,  Plates  1-4,  13  text  figures,  1  map,  and  7  plans.     1914.     Price,  $.75. 
II.     (In  preparation.) 

Volume  XVI. 

I.     The  Sun  Dance  of  the  Crow  Indians.     By  Robert  H.  Lowie.     Pp.  1-50, 
and  11  text  figures.     1915.     Price,  $.50. 
II.     (In  preparation.) 

Volume  XVII. 

I.  Riding  Gear  of  the  North  American  Indians.  By  Clark  Wissler.  Pp. 
1-38,  and  27  text  figures.  1915.  -Price,  $.50. 

II.     Costumes  of  the  Plains  Indians.     By  Clark  Wissler.     Pp.  41-91,  and  28 
text  figures.     1915.     Price,  $.50. 

III.  Structural  Basis  to  the  Decoration  of  Costumes  among  the  Plains  Indians. 
By  Clark  Wissler.     Pp.  93-114,  and  12  text  figures.     1916.     Price,  .?.2'». 

IV.  Basketry  of  the  Papago  and  Pima.     By  Mary  Lois  Kissell.     Pp.  115-264, 
and  81  text  figures.     1916.     Price,  $1.50. 

V.     (In  preparation.) 

Volume  XVIII. 

I.  Zuiii  Potsherds.  By  A.  L.  Kroeber.  Pp.  1-37,  and  2  text  figures.  1916. 
Price,  $.30. 

II.     Zuiii  Kin  and  Clan.     By  A.  L.  Kroeber.     Pp.  39-204,  3  text  figures,  and 
9  maps.     1917.     Price,  $1.50. 

III.  An  Outline  for  a  Chronology  of  Zuni  Ruins.    By  Leslie  Spier.    Pp.  207- 
331,  and  IS  text  figures.    1917.    Price,  $1.00. 

IV.  (In  preparation.) 

Volume  XIX. 

I.     The  Whale  House  of  the  Chilkat.     By  George  T.  Kinmons.      Pp.   1-33. 
Plates  I-IV,  and  6  text  figures.     1916.     Price,  $1.00. 
II.     (In  preparation.) 

Volume  XX. 

(In  preparation.) 

Volume  XXI. 

1.     Notes  on  the  Social  Organization  and  Customs  of  the  Mandan,  Hidatsa, 
and  Crow  Indians.     By  Robert  H.  Lowie.     Pp.  1-99.     1917.     Price,  $1.00. 
II.     (In  preparation.) 


LOAN  DEPT. 


»^____FEB  1  1  2005" 
REC'D  LD 


(D6471slO)476B 


.  General  Library 

Umversuy  of  California 
Berkeley 


• 

.-.•;> ; 


1 


T/ie  Cosmos  Press,  Cambridge,  Massachusetts. 


Gaylamount 

Pamphlet 

Binder 

Gaylord  Bros..  Inc. 

Stockton,  Calif. 

T.  M.  Reg.  U.S. Pat.  Off. 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


